I understand all the comments made about the legal impact etc. But one thing you all seem to forget is this.
It doesnt really matter is she made them public or not. The point was that the picture was posted with a clear intent of inflicting emotional distress upon her. That is against the law, plain and simple.
She does own the picture, and asked that it not be posted by anyone.
Remember this, if she was to sue the person who distributed it, posted it and the site itself, she might loose (I doubt it), but the legal bills to defend the case would be huge.
So whomever did it, could be out to loose a LOT of $$ if smalls goes after them. DFG pulled the pic down both times case he knows this. The site shouldnt be held liable, but the people who posted it could.