Ah, the antics of our youth! who knew that Cameron Diaz would go from steamy porn flicks to Hollywood stardom? Apparently, Cameron forgot about the vultures who love to dig up the dirt on a star's past. And, dig they did. 'She's no Angel' won't appear on box office draw Cameron's filmography credits, but certainly this bit of bondage kink certainly WILL appear somewhere where YOU can see it in its entire seedy, back alley totality. While many might see this little movie chapter as a little softcore, there are plenty of those Charlie's Angel's fans who will be using plenty of tissues to wipe up the cum from getting off on her, shall we say, all tied up performance for the dark theatre crowd? Before she was an A-list star of Shrek, There's Something About Mary and Charlie's Angels, Diaz displayed some decidedly un-angelic behavior in a salacious S&M video shot back in 1992. That video, at the center of a contentious, ongoing legal battle between Diaz and the man who filmed it, hit the Web Wednesday and is rapidly becoming the download du jour. Cameron Diaz did not expect this low budget film to surface, but float to the top of the Hollywood scandal sites, it did. In its entirety. Leaving nothing to the imagination. She didn't even wear a mask to hide her face. Perhaps our little 'Something about Mary' star, never expected to be a star. Well, at least not a legitimate star. But, leading lady that she is, Cameron gave the performance of her young 19 year old life, when she took the rold for this racy S & M flick. The steamy 48 minute, uncut version, surfaced on a Website. No surprise there. Be indiscreet and you WILL find yourself the subject of tabloid news on the 'net. The video, titled She's No Angel, is still available--but serious digging is required now that , the site that was selling the vid for $40 a pop, seems to be down. Keyword 'seems'. But the damage is done, as file-sharing has made the video and stills taken from it available worldwide. Look hard enough and you'll find it. There are those who will make sure you find it. While we were out celebrating the Fourth of July, a strange e-mail "press release" heralding the imminent arrival of a "kinky S&M Cameron Diaz film" landed in our inbox. Somehow, between vomiting off a roof in the South Bay and nearly losing our genitals to a suspiciously well-aimed bottle rocket, we forgot about the mysterious press release. Then an infamous blog started getting e-mails, announcing the Cameron Diaz video had hit the internet. We've seen the trailer for the video (so can you), and in it a much younger Diaz displays a bit of craft you won't hear about on Inside the Actor's Studio, unless the host finally cracks and does the show on mushrooms: Cameron perks up her nipples with a can of freon or compressed air. We've nearly fainted wondering about what goodies the full-length offering must hold! The site hosting the video keeps crashing, but we imagine they'll have that remedied soon enough to meet the public's demand for seeing the highest-paid actress in Hollywood bare her chest and play with chains when she was obviously living a little more paycheck-to-paycheck. If you insist on reading about some legal problems surrounding the video, go right ahead. You need something to do while the website comes back online. Some notable moments to titillate your own senses: Titled She's No Angel: Cameron Diaz, the 30-minute film shows the then-19 model baring her breasts and getting kinky in a softcore photo session for cameraman John Rutter. According to a legitimate newspaper publication, the video features Diaz topless and in fishnets. She and a leather-clad model named Natasha are vamping it up in a bondage scene with a chained man wearing nothing but a loose-fitting loincloth. At one point, the twosome toy with their male "slave," making him wear a black leather bondage mask and pretending to subjugate him. In another notable moment, Diaz gets down and dirty, prancing around topless while Rutter (doing his best Austin Powers' impersonation) barks orders like, "Attitude!," "Strut it, baby!," "I want you hot and sexy!" and "Cat-like! Cat-like!" Finally, in the climax, Diaz sprays a can of compressed air on her boobs and giggles: "Whoa! Look at them! Look at how big they got!" According to some early online reviews, the Diaz display isn't exactly in the same league as Shrek 2. "You've seen better acting in the Paris Hilton video," opines a certain famous blog, noting that Diaz appears in only two-thirds of the video and is only bra-less in one-third., meanwhile, says "You're better off using a copy of Charlie's Angels as a self-love aid than wasting $40 on the Diaz video." What's shown in the complete video, easily found, since bootleg copies are floating everywhere like algae in a pool, is 48 minutes of pure BDSM and Cameron frolicking as its shining star. Dare we say frolicking in the same breath as BDSM? Sure. We've seen the video. Why shouldn't you? It's as much a must see as any of our adorable blonde Cameron's many other movies for which she DOES claim credit. What makes this particular flick, available in all its commercial free glory, fascinating, is the ensuing legal battle to suppress it and remove its presence. Making this disappear seems a little overkill, since all publicity is seen as good publicity. Watch out, Cameron. When the rags cease to talk about you, you may miss the days when you were a headliner in a 'B' rated bondage flick. Ms. Diaz looks very sexy in this footage and of course her being topless is a major plus. Itís not everyday people get to see one of the biggest female movie star in Hollywood, in this type of a role, and she is hot! But. The release of the movie (and there IS a movie, believe it!) was followed by a bloody courtroom drama, involving our little Cameron, who did go on to become the star and John Rutter, aptly named, maybe for his, ahem, rutting abilities? Certainly not for his directing abilities. He did, however, pick just the right nineteen year old, when our little angel decided to play on the seedier side of the Hollywood block. Fast forward to the future. Diaz, now a Tinseltown powerbroker, she wanted to keep a lid on the footage. She and Rutter battled for nearly a year. For his part, Rutter claims Diaz signed off on a valid release at the time it was shot. One of Hollywood's highest-paid actress, however, says the signature was forged and accuses the shutterbug of trying to blackmail her for $3.3 million in exchange for not releasing the titillating pics. Los Angeles prosecutors alleged Rutter forged Diaz's signature on a model release form in August 2002 giving him control of some salacious photos of the actress snapped before she was famous. Nearly a year later, on June 23, 2003, they claim, he sought a multimillion-dollar payoff from the actress to keep the photos under wraps. Rutter was also charged with attempted grand theft and perjury related to the sexy shots. Diaz, was clearly mortified at the prospect of the pictures getting out. She may have been young and needed the money, but she claimed she certainly did not authorize Rutter to sell the pictures--to anyone. The Charlie's Angels star has vehemently denied signing any release form. He who tried to sully Cameron Diaz's angelic image shall now pay the price. Photographer John Rutter, who was convicted in July on felony charges of forgery, perjury and attempted grand theft, was sentenced Thursday to almost four years behind bars. Rutter's troubles began after he approached Diaz with topless photos he snapped of her in 1992--before her film career skyrocketed--and demanded that the actress hand over $3 million for the shots or else he would sell them to the highest bidder. Diaz maintained that she never signed a release for the photos and insisted that the signature on Rutter's document was a forgery--a finding that was substantiated by forensic experts in court. Calling Rutter the "shot-caller" in a "scheme to defraud Miss Diaz," a Los Angeles Superior Court judge rejected the shutterbug's plea for probation and ordered him to do 44 months in state prison. Rutter had faced a maximum sentence of 56 months behind bars. Though Rutter had no prior criminal record, Pastor said that his actions in the Diaz situation involved "definite criminal sophistication." "Mr. Rutter did take advantage of a position of confidence that Miss Diaz had in Mr. Rutter," it has been said. Diaz was not in court for the photog's sentencing, but his mother and girlfriend looked on as he read from a statement, calling the situation a "misunderstanding" and asking for leniency. "I deeply regret the perception that I had done wrong," Rutter told the judge. "I never intended any harm...It's a shame this whole mess ever happened." Rutter even invoked literary references in an effort to explain his plight, saying that he felt like he was living in a modern-day version of John Steinbeck' s The Pearl. "My pearl, my life, my loved ones have been turned upside down," Rutter said. However, the judge was apparently in a less than sympathetic mood, stating that he felt Rutter was "not remorseful" and that his remarks came "too little, too late and are simply not credible as far as I'm concerned." Outside the court following the hearing, the Deputy District Attorney told reporters that, in his opinion, Rutter was "a forgerer, a con artist, a schemer that attempted to unfairly take advantage of Miss Diaz. "He's consistently shown no remorse. He's consistently insisted he is the victim. He has consistently accused others of wrongdoing and denied any responsibility for himself," the prosecutor said. Diaz and Rutter still have to square off in a civil case related to the photos. Trial in that matter is scheduled for Feb. 15, 2006 in Santa Monica Superior Court. Meanwhile, Diaz will be returning to the big screen next month in In Her Shoes, her first onscreen role since 2003's Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle. Her breasts, on the other hand, will stay under wraps. Too little, too late. Bootleg copies are available and ready to download. File sharing sites and other websites are ready to let you see what the 'not so angelic' Cameron did before she crossed the Hollywood Boulevard to stardom. According to some early online reviews, the Diaz display isn't exactly in the same league as Shrek 2. "You've seen better acting in the Paris Hilton video," opines the blog, noting that Diaz appears in only two-thirds of the video and is only bra-less in one-third., meanwhile, says "You're better off using a copy of Charlie's Angels as a self-love aid than wasting $40 on the Diaz video." Shortly after going live with the video, posted a message on its site saying it's unable to show the trailer due to heavy traffic. In a press release, the Carribean-based distributor bought the rights to the footage from Rutter sometime last year. "To the best of my understanding, Rutter had sold the licensing rights to the tape and photos years ago, and picked it up sometime early last year," says a spokesperson identified only as KB. "It was a long, drawn-out case against Rutter that ran the gamut from extortion to forgery, but later it was ruled he did in fact have the copyright on the production." Diaz's camp is disputing that contention. In a statement to the Post, her publicist notes that a Los Angeles judge issued a permanent injunction last November that "prohibits anyone from selling, licensing, syndicating, distributing, publishing, broadcasting, disseminating, displaying or commercially exploiting the photos and video shot by John Rutter in 1992. There are already criminal proceedings pending against Rutter. A cease-and-desist letter has been sent to the Website." The injunction came after reports surfaced that Rutter had been offered a $5 million for the tape and accompanying photos. On Thursday, Diaz publicist Brad Cafarelli declined further comment, "in light of the fact that there are ongoing criminal and civil proceedings pending regarding this matter." Rutter's rep, Storm Jenkins, said the photographer "has had no involvement with the Website that's releasing the video." Jenkins also said that the D.A. is making Rutter a "scapegoat" by pressing forward with criminal charges. Rutter is due to stand trial July 21 for attempted grand theft, forgery and perjury--all charges relating to his battle with Diaz over the photos and video. He was originally arrested and charged with attempted extortion, attempted grand theft, perjury and two counts of forgery, but the Los Angeles County D.A. later dropped the extortion counts. Rutter has since filed a $10 million suit against Diaz, claiming fraud and breach of contract. Ironically, while she's battled to avoid becoming the next Paris or Pam online, Diaz isn't above playing off her sexy bod. She recently signed to star as a Playboy Playmate in 20th Century Fox's upcoming film, X Girls, a comedy about curvaceous babes competing in Mark Burnett's Eco-Challenge.

So. From kinky bondage queen to Playboy Playmate and a whole lot of Shrek and Angel in between, what's in store for our favourite Hollywood actress? Well, who knows what Ms. Diaz will do next? Maybe, just maybe, she'll stop battling the natural curiousity of men and women and let the wild side emerge, take pride in her body, and revel in her exploration of pure, unadulaterated SEX! Climaxing is a good thing, Cameron, and the world deserves to see it all! Right down to your boobies bared for all to see in the 48 minute video, available on your porn friendly, neighbourhood internet.


Warning: include(../specials.txt) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/sextapesvideo/public_html/uncut-camerondiazsextape/index.php on line 120

Warning: include(../specials.txt) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/sextapesvideo/public_html/uncut-camerondiazsextape/index.php on line 120

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '../specials.txt' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/sextapesvideo/public_html/uncut-camerondiazsextape/index.php on line 120