46. Big deal if it is Kristin..she's not that hot to begin with.

Posted at 8:58AM on Mar 20th 2008 by Jay

47. This is actually Susie Rachel Norman Bouknight, a teacher in South Carolina.

Posted at 11:29AM on Mar 20th 2008 by IKnowHer

48. This is not the spitzer-girl, this is Kristen Davis from Sex in the City. And 'whatever' let the spitzer-girl get famous she probly deserves it cause she ain't a nag and ain't a prude, unlike some prudes out there. Plus, everything in the world cost so much, like her apt. True her hot body could have lured him, but I think there is more in the marriage than we all see. How do you know she homewrecked, she might of saved a lot of marriges, don't assume. I just heard the NEW N.Y. governer had an affair. Plus the Kristen you are talking about has pretty good.music. Back to the pic, they could be her, but is it porn or just nudity, there is a difference. I won't act like a dingbat if it was her. Wouldn't bother me.

Posted at 1:02PM on Mar 20th 2008 by getitright

49. its her and shes hot......

Posted at 2:39PM on Mar 20th 2008 by pat

50. Look like her to me. She's dumb to the deny the photos if they are her though. Sooner or later definite proof will arise.

Posted at 4:29PM on Mar 20th 2008 by Izabael DaJinn

51. This specific picture kind of looks like Cheryl Burke, but as for the others...they REALLY resemble Kristin Davis!

Posted at 10:36PM on Mar 20th 2008 by Uh Huh

52. Whether these photographs are genuine or not, it is simply reprehensible that a former boyfriend would allow them to become public. In the digital age lovers often use photography to spice up their lives and preserve memories for each other. Each partner should be able to trust the other not to misuse the photographs. If the photos are, indeed, of Miss Davis, she was simply betrayed by a person in whom she placed her trust.

Posted at 12:57PM on Mar 21st 2008 by John

53. I'm not sure it's her, but there is obviously another woman involved, otherwise what is that perky boob with the erect nipple doing in the upper right corner of the photo??? See??? Anyone know what that is, or why it's there??

Posted at 9:45PM on Mar 25th 2008 by Tozhie

54. that's GOTTA be her on the right. the left I'm not so sure.

I have to go burn some pictures now, ciao

Posted at 10:33PM on Mar 25th 2008 by keb

55. Even if it is her or not, this happened a while back, this does not reflect on her now and this in another way it does, let me explain. Who are we to judge her anyway. What she did or didn't do is not for us to judge. I think we all maybe should take a look at ourselves and ask how would we feel if we were in the same shoes. We all sin, we all make mistakes, and none of us are perfect. I wouldn't beat her up as this is not my place to do so. This is between Kristin and her own inner self to deal with. Only she can determine if the person in the picture is her or not, even if not it is an attack on her person. She is the only one to judge her own self and deal with her own integrity as an individual. What ever happens even if it is her and she faces it full force she will be better for it if she does and it is her. It's the creep that exposed her who is the true fool in all of this. If it was her this was done without her knowledge and to intentionally hurt her. And look what it's done. Unleashed all of us upon her some of us calling her horrible names. What did Jesus do for Mary Magdeline. Can any of you project a completely squeecky clean super goody two shoes life. Never done a single thing wrong. Never had a bad slezzy thought cross your minds? Any of you have any pictures lurking that might surface one day? You might want to think about that before you go call someone a whore, or any other name you feel appropriate. The woman has not killed anyone, she hasn't committed a sin that has broken any laws or that would breach any laws? So until any of us have the right or the athority or the proof to actually charge her with a crime, let's stop and think about this. I beleive everyone is innocent until proven guility and after all what is she guilty of? Being horney? Someone had mentioned a younger boy in one of the pictures well the aledged Kristin only looks to be about 15 or 16 and most boys that age always look much younger so even if he's 14 to 16 he's still in range to be with her and that's not even remotely distrubing. What's disturbing is how dirty the mind of the person was who made the comment, where in God's name is your mind? I don't frequent these blogs, but I happen to like this actress and I think she's gifted and what she may or may not have done at the age of 16 had nothing to do with who she is now. People change, and reducing ourselves to the level of name calling is simply hateful. The fact that any of you would lower yourselves to that level is repulsive. Personally Kristin doesn't deserve it and the 16 year old girl in the pictures whoever she is did not deserve it. The old boyfriend who claims to be Kristin's needs to be sued for defaming her character wheather it is her or not and I hope she puts on her best "B"itch and lets him have it. If I were her I would nail his britches to the nearest tree and exposed him and if it were or were not me in the same boat, I would use the situation to my advantage and capatlize on what the free publicity could bring me. So Kristin Honey if your reading this rise above this batard and break his balls "Be a Charlott and let him have it!" Do it for all the women who are exploited as girls and abused as women. This is an attack on you even if it is or is not you in those pictures, the point I'm making is damage has been done just by the accusasion. Get this guy, he's commintted a crime upon your reputation.

Posted at 5:42PM on Apr 6th 2008 by BeBe