Samantha Cameron's sister Emily Sheffield hits out at Daily Mail for 'forensically glaring' bikini pictures
Vogue deputy editor reacts after newspaper publishes pictures of former Prime Minister's wife and analysis of her body

There a few high-profile women who have been lucky enough to escape the Daily Mail’s microscope lens hovering over their face or body for signs of weight gain or ageing.
Renee Zellweger, Stella McCartney and Kate Moss have all appeared in articles where “unrecognisable”, and “taken its toll” are almost perquisite descriptions. This week, it was Samantha Cameron’s turn.
Ms Cameron was treated to her once over after photographs of the Cameron’s enjoying their first holiday abroad since leaving Downing Street dropped, with both pictured in their swimwear.
While Ms Cameron’s summary was arguably more forgiving than the women subjected to it before her, her sister and Vogue deputy editor Emily Sheffield criticised the Mail for publishing “forensically glaring pictures”.
The piece pointed to what it said was a lump on Ms Cameron’s stomach and asked unidentified “medical experts” to comment, who advised: "It is probably a small bulge in the frontal wall of the abdomen that is common in women who have undergone multiple pregnancies.”
The Mail also enlisted a plastic surgeon to comment on Ms Cameron’s figure after having four children and a fitness expert to compare the physique of husband and wife.
In her response, Ms Sheffield demanded to know why it believed it had the right to publish “forensically glaring pictures” of the former Prime Minister’s wife.
Ms Sheffield also emerged as a staunch defender of her brother-in-law in the aftermath of Brexit. “In my opinion, you brought down a good man,“ she wrote in a piece for the Spectator.
“To the media and the electorate he was the Prime Minister. To me, he was also my sister’s husband, who loved and protected her through truly terrible times.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments