TMZ

Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Violent Surfers Shred Paps Over McConaughey

6/22/2008 1:27 PM PDT BY TMZ STAFF

A group of surfers just got gnarly on a group of paps -- all over photos of beach king Matthew McConaughey!

Around 12 photographers were on the beach in Malibu Saturday afternoon trying to get shots of Matty hitting the surf, when an all-out smackdown was laid on the pappers by turf-protecting surfers.

One pap was hit in the face and we're told suffered a broken nose, while another was thrown into some rocks and had his camera smashed. McConaughey was not involved in the ruckus.

Police tell us a battery report was filed by one photographer but no arrests have been made.

A rep for Matthew has yet to get back to us.

522 COMMENTS

No Avatar
106.

Robert    

California Penal Code Section 646.9

646.9 Stalking

(a) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family is guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison.


(b) Any person who violates subdivision (a) when there is a temporary restraining order, injunction, or any other court order in effect prohibiting the behavior described in subdivision (a) against the same party, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.


(c) (1) Every person who, after having been convicted of a felony under Section 273.5, 273.6, or 422, commits a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years.


(2) Every person who, after having been convicted of a felony under subdivision (a), commits a violation of this section shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years.


(d) In addition to the penalties provided in this section, the sentencing court may order a person convicted of a felony under this section to register as a sex offender pursuant to subparagraph (E) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 290.


(e) For the purposes of this section, "harasses" means engages in a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the person, and that serves no legitimate purpose.


(f) For the purposes of this section, "course of conduct" means two or more acts occurring over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of "course of conduct."


(g) For the purposes of this section, "credible threat" means a verbal or written threat, including that performed through the use of an electronic communication device, or a threat implied by a pattern of conduct or a combination of verbal, written, or electronically communicated statements and conduct, made with the intent to place the person that is the target of the threat in reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family, and made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat so as to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family. It is not necessary to prove that the defendant had the intent to actually carry out the threat. The present incarceration of a person making the threat shall not be a bar to prosecution under this section. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of "credible threat."


(h) For purposes of this section, the term "electronic communication device" includes, but is not limited to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video recorders, fax machines, or pagers. "Electronic communication" has the same meaning as the term defined in Subsection 12 of Section 2510 of Title 18 of the United States Code.


(i) This section shall not apply to conduct that occurs during labor picketing.


(j) If probation is granted, or the execution or imposition of a sentence is suspended, for any person convicted under this section, it shall be a condition of probation that the person participate in counseling, as designated by the court. However, the court, upon a showing of good cause, may find that the counseling requirement shall not be imposed.


(k) The sentencing court also shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with the victim, that may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. It is the intent of the Legislature that the length of any restraining order be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and his or her immediate family.


(l) For purposes of this section, "immediate family" means any spouse, parent, child, any person related by consanguinity or affinity within the second degree, or any other person who regularly resides in the household, or who, within the prior six months, regularly resided in the household.


(m) The court shall consider whether the defendant would benefit from treatment pursuant to Section 2684. If it is determined to b

2223 days ago
107.

Marcus    

Ooooooh! A bunch of skinny, pot belly surfers beat up of the paps. That's hilarious. These guys couldn't fight their own shadows if they were left to go one-on-one. What a bunch of wusss surfer wannabes. I hope you have your boyfriends ready when one of you gets your ass beat by someone because you can't fight alone for sure. It shows on this video. Maybe too much draft beer. Sun and alcohol don't mix boys. The paps rulre!!!

2223 days ago
108.

alek12    

i think the paps should be controlled somewhat, but that was way to extreme of the surfers

what a bunch of losers

2223 days ago
109.

Kelli    

Harvey isn't working, it is the weekend, I doubt he even aprroves these post. Thanks for the legal aspect of this Robert. Have a great weekend everybody. Matthew better live it up while he can. Can't wait to see him and his little bambino surfing someday.

2223 days ago
110.

Rosy    

Good!!! Finally, some paps got what is coming to them!!!

2223 days ago
111.

chris    

i'm disappointed with the surfers- they stopped at the paps. had they beaten down bongo boy, it would've been a perfect day.

2223 days ago
112.

Agnitio Veridicus    

I don't condone what the surfers did, but I understand it. I didn't see any release forms being signed. Maybe they weren't hip to intrusive photographers snapping pics of private citizens (in with Matthew) without their consent. Shocking, but some folks don't want to be photographed or video taped.

2223 days ago
113.

carm    

Tresspassing? is malibu a 'private beach'? The surfers are in the wrong they dont own the beach and arnt in any position to ask ANYONE to leave. local or not. The paps as far as im concerned ...well its just insane that stalking, being a peeping Tom and publishing someone elses image [and making money off of] is considered legal when your getting a pay check for it.

The surfers are the embarressment in this case though -two wrongs dont make a right. {and i AM a surfer alt chik}

2223 days ago
114.

chris from vancouverBC    

f*ing paps. weak b&tches got what they deserved.

the little b&tch saying "oh I called the cops". LMAO - i hope he got a broke nose.
but...if you really want to stop them, stop buying magazines or visiting tmz...

2223 days ago
115.

LindaLou    

I live near the beach in LA County. Surfers are known to defen their "turf" in ways that aren't always legal. They probably felt the paps were ruining their spot. No doubt they were. While I can't condone the violence, I must say the paps have this coming to them. They break the law every bleepin' day...and yeah, they're stalkers.

2223 days ago
116.

Robert    

No prob K girl, # 99 you just wish you cold be me. goodnight folks.

2223 days ago
117.

Tmz's Paps are Homos    

good point, robert. paps got beaten down by skinny, drunken surfer dudes. just proves how pansified paproids REALLY are. just like their queen, harvey "fugly wimp" levin. go righteous surfer dudues.!!!!!!

2223 days ago
118.

greggo    

THAT WAS AWESOME!!!!!!! God bless California!! We should all take a lesson!
Easily, the BEST footage I have seen on this site to date.

2223 days ago
119.

Lekili    

Everyone is missing the point here. This is a public beach, no drinking is allowed at most beaches and the majority of "surfers" all had beers in hand. The Paps in question seemed to be minding their own business until the surfer dudes started mixing it up with them. So who is really at fault??
You might not like photographers being on the beach but they are entitled, just like everyone else and they have a right to be there without the threat of being beaten up buy a bunch of drunks!
I hope the surfer dudes are arrested for beating up the photographer and fined for public intoxication,glass container on a beach and whatever else charges can be brought against them.

2223 days ago
120.

SadistikEastwood    

I was there aswell.. one guy said "im with TMZ" and well he no longer has a nose.. and by the way when we all smoked sum bud with MC later he said they got what was coming ahahah suck one tmz

2223 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web