Cheryl Baker~ Look-a-like or the real deal?

[doctor_c]

Originally Posted by Clouddancer;

I dont know if this is fake or real? Its quite a nice photo
however so Ihope its genuine. If you decide its fake perhaps someone could shift it to the fakes section.
Enjoy anyway.

I'm bound to believe this is a look-alike on the basis of the following:
1) The rules of the fake detective http://www.fake-detective.com/secrets/secrets1.htm
- Most celebrities do NOT pose for nude photographs!.
- Celebrities who pose nude do not usually pose for only ONE picture.

And this is the only one that can be found

2) Every posed photograph Cheryl is smiling. And the woman here is not. Rather looking sour.

3) She seldom wears necklaces (in the photographs that is), but when she does, she has always a pair of matching earrings. This woman has only a necklace.

4) Compare the head of the woman in this photograph with the head of Cheryl in the photographs posted by Sam Spade on 08-29-2009.

No, this woman isn't Cheryl. Not even a look-alike in my opinion.

[teabags]

Originally Posted by doctor_c

I'm bound to believe this is a look-alike on the basis of the following:
1) The rules of the fake detective http://www.fake-detective.com/secrets/secrets1.htm
- Most celebrities do NOT pose for nude photographs!.
- Celebrities who pose nude do not usually pose for only ONE picture.

And this is the only one that can be found

2) Every posed photograph Cheryl is smiling. And the woman here is not. Rather looking sour.

3) She seldom wears necklaces (in the photographs that is), but when she does, she has always a pair of matching earrings. This woman has only a necklace.

4) Compare the head of the woman in this photograph with the head of Cheryl in the photographs posted by Sam Spade on 08-29-2009.

No, this woman isn't Cheryl. Not even a look-alike in my opinion.

actually i think this woman looks a lot like her, and you dont actually SEE anything, just some boob(no nip) and lots of thigh(she's shown as much if not more thigh in the past in other pics)

i agree with your points, but doesnt mean that this is not Cheryl, i'll save judgement for now

[doctor_c]

The mole on the right nostril seems different. But on the left nostril of the disputed photograph there is a dark indistinctive spot. Shadow? Another mole?
Furthermore, Cheryl has green or bluegreen eyes whereas the woman in the disputed picture has brown eyes. Ok, she could have had coloured lenses.
I checked all the pictures (there are some dead links) and all green/bluegreen.


And the question remains; since this is not a red carpet shot but a posed shot, why only 1?

[TheFool]

I'm sure the disputed photograph is real. First of all she isn't nude and may well have under-estimated how much the catsuit would become transparent under photographers lights. Secondly you can't judge eye colour from professional photographs as they use a lot of filters. Finally I watched pippi's clip from Loose Women and she's definitely wearing the same distinctive ring. Here are a couple of screenshots. The resolution isn't that great but if you watch the clip you can clearly see the white star shape.

[rustler]

I mentioned in an earlier thread, I thought in this section?, about having seen some pictures of Cheryl Baker in the Fiesta, Readers Wives section. Some people didn't belive me. Well, Hattertim, scholar that he is, has come up trumps!

Here, courtesy of Hattertim, are the pictures, from a copy of Fiesta in 2000.

Is it her?? I think so. Or maybe that is just wishful thinking on my part. 'Cheryl of Bakersfield'....................?? Hmmmmmm Over to you.........






Thanks Hattertim for taking the time........

[mickey214]

Originally Posted by rustler

I mentioned in an earlier thread, I thought in this section?, about having seen some pictures of Cheryl Baker in the Fiesta, Readers Wives section. Some people didn't belive me. Well, Hattertim, scholar that he is, has come up trumps!

Here, courtesy of Hattertim, are the pictures, from a copy of Fiesta in 2000.

Is it her?? I think so. 'Cheryl of Bakersfield'....................?? Hmmmmmm Over to you.........






Thanks Hattertim for taking the time........

Sadly this link appears to be dead.

I definately remember Cheryl doing a full nude spread in the early 70's, but cannot for the life of me remember which magazine

[captainhowdy]

to be honest, the only pic of those four that looks like her is pic one, the rest are minimal in resemblance.
something tells me that Cheryl doesnt have a pierced clit either.

[rustler]

Originally Posted by captainhowdy

to be honest, the only pic of those four that looks like her is pic one, the rest are minimal in resemblance.
something tells me that Cheryl doesnt have a pierced clit either.

Possibly, picture one does have a better resemblance of Cheryl than the others, but what 'tells' you that she doesn't have a pierced clit?? Who knows, how do you know, or do you know something that we don't???

[Sam Spade]

Originally Posted by rustler

, but what 'tells' you that she doesn't have a pierced clit?? Who knows, how do you know, or do you know something that we don't???

I don't know about her nether regions, but I'd bet my left nut that she has never posed for such pictures.

[monkeynuts]

Originally Posted by doctor_c

I'm bound to believe this is a look-alike on the basis of the following:
1) The rules of the fake detective http://www.fake-detective.com/secrets/secrets1.htm
- Most celebrities do NOT pose for nude photographs!
- Celebrities who pose nude do not usually pose for only ONE picture.

And this is the only one that can be found

2) Every posed photograph Cheryl is smiling. And the woman here is not. Rather looking sour.

3) She seldom wears necklaces (in the photographs that is), but when she does, she has always a pair of matching earrings. This woman has only a necklace.

4) Compare the head of the woman in this photograph with the head of Cheryl in the photographs posted by Sam Spade on 08-29-2009.

No, this woman isn't Cheryl. Not even a look-alike in my opinion.

No offence intended, but just epically wrong on every level based on assumptions.

Just because it seems out of character does not mean it isn't her (although she's never been the shy type).

Just because there is only one image does not mean it isn't her. Few images taken by a tog are released for media distribution, more are released in sets these days due to digital photography being easier. A lot of older stock is not digitised and will likely never see light of day. Back in 1992 I doubt there was much demand for a wide selection so little was released.

Thinking it can't be her due to wearing a necklace and not matching earrings is frankly bizarre. A person can wear whatever they wish or is demanded for the shoot. Cover her in blue paint and stick a smurf hat on, it's still her even if she doesn't normally wear either.

CSI seriously has a lot to answer for. Anyway...

http://www.mirrorpix.com/webgate/pre...IMGID=00162346

I'm actually surprised that this was even questionable. Of course, i'll look a complete dick if the link doesn't work

Capped just in case