Erin Andrews

Okay, I'll just throw this out there to see where the conversation goes.
So some of you think she deserves $55M. What should the dollar amount have been if the perverted criminal had raped her? Obviously, her suffering would have been exponentially worse, so the damages should be more.
 
Gerhardt said:
Okay, I'll just throw this out there to see where the conversation goes.
So some of you think she deserves $55M. What should the dollar amount have been if the perverted criminal had raped her? Obviously, her suffering would have been exponentially worse, so the damages should be more.
Click to expand...

You are looking at this solely from the perspective of compensating Andrews. The jury was probably looking at this from the perspective that the hotel, and perhaps the industry, needed to be more mindful of the security of the guests. This time it was only a video. Next time it could be a rape or murder. So the verdict might not have been much different if she was raped, though in all likelihood, the jury would have been more ****ed off at the hotel and the number would have been bigger than not based on any mathematical formula. There have been articles published that state that the whole industry has tightened up security since this lawsuit. Maybe that is a good thing.
 
Hmm, so as long as it's an "upscale" hotel, they're fair game. Got it. LOL... If you're staying at the roach motel, no expectation of privacy... and the "law" treats everyone the same... riiiiiiiggggght. :)
 
Kristin said:
There have been articles published that state that the whole industry has tightened up security since this lawsuit.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO... riiiiiighht... sure they have...

"Here, hand out these post-it notes to anyone who wants their peephole covered..." LOL LOL LOL ...
 
denverpilot said:
Hmm, so as long as it's an "upscale" hotel, they're fair game. Got it. LOL... If you're staying at the roach motel, no expectation of privacy... and the "law" treats everyone the same... riiiiiiiggggght. :)
Click to expand...

You get what you pay for.
 
Stewartb said:
You guys have entirely too much time to worry about other people's business.
Click to expand...
I don't care about other people's smutty business but if it ends up costing me money (this will cost us all, WE are paying her without our consent), I tend to speak up.
It just takes one idiot (the perp), another idiot (the lawyer) and a dozen more idiots (the jury) to do something this stupid. The land of opportunity.
 
In the 90s, when Michael Jordan was a sensation, I once stayed at a big hotel where guests whispered that he was staying as well. We tried asking hotel staff if it was true, and they all declined to comment.

And so I found that hotels do exist that protect the privacy of celebrity guests. I'm quite sure that someone specifically asking for a room next to Jordan's would have not gotten it.

Erin's Marriott did not protect her privacy, and indeed it did not show any common sense, in providing the room next to hers when the pervert asked for it. It deserves to pay a few million, and the appellate court will probably arrive at a figure like that.
 
according to an article I read, the hotel management claims they didn't give him the room next to hers knowingly. They say he went through the corporate site and requested a particular room, the front desk never knew about it.

The guy himself said he found her room number by calling the front desk from a phone in the lobby or restaurant. When they connected him, her number showed up on the display. In that case, they did acknowledge that she was staying there by transferring the call, and he ended up with her room number.

--

I don't think it's uncommon for celebs to check-in using fake names. But I guess if you don't consider yourself a celebrity, you might not think about it.
 
EdFred said:
Personally I couldn't care less if someone saw me naked in a hotel or not.
Click to expand...

Well, the only way to prove that is to post a photo of yourself naked next time you're in a hotel. Still wouldn't be the same as someone involuntarily having that happen, but it would be a valuable step in proving that you're making a serious argument and not just completely failing to empathize with what she went through.
 
172andyou said:
Well, the only way to prove that is to post a photo of yourself naked next time you're in a hotel. Still wouldn't be the same as someone involuntarily having that happen, but it would be a valuable step in proving that you're making a serious argument and not just completely failing to empathize with what she went through.
Click to expand...

Who says I haven't? It just wasn't here.
 
Bill Jennings said:
The woman has professional pictures taken like this:

e85cce519b223f112271ea3333f2a283.jpg
Click to expand...
That's Charlotte Jackson, not Erin Andrews
 
Matthew said:
The guy himself said he found her room number by calling the front desk from a phone in the lobby or restaurant. When they connected him, her number showed up on the display. In that case, they did acknowledge that she was staying there by transferring the call, and he ended up with her room number.
Click to expand...

An interesting info leak.
  • Why should phones display other room numbers/extensions when connected through the front-desk?
  • Perhaps room extension numbers shouldn't match room number at all?
  • Should there even be room to room direct-dial?
  • How many people ACTUALLY need that direct room-to-room dialing feature anyway?
Excellent questions for a modern telecom engineer. I'm available to consult. I'll take $55M.
 
Kristin said:
Marriott was a big loser in this trial, even though they were not a defendant. This did not help the Marriott brand one little bit.
Click to expand...


Looks like they needed to tighten their supervision of franchisees on security issues. In this case it was a perv stalker, in other cases it may be an ex husband who wants to off his ex to evade alimony etc. I have seen some real sloppy handling of this by different hotels.
 
denverpilot said:
  • Should there even be room to room direct-dial?
  • How many people ACTUALLY need that direct room-to-room dialing feature
Click to expand...

The only time I have ever used room to room was with a larger party, like a wedding where you have to coordinate people getting into a bus etc. For all I care, hotels could restrict calls to the front-desk or outside.
 
denverpilot said:
  • How many people ACTUALLY need that direct room-to-room dialing feature anyway?
Click to expand...
I use it all the time, especially in Canada, since international cell phone calls are $1/min for me. They are international calls even though the person I am calling is a few rooms away. :p

I know that at least some hotels won't give out your room number if someone asks for you by name, but they will connect you to the room phone.
 
Everskyward said:
I use it all the time, especially in Canada, since international cell phone calls are $1/min for me. They are international calls even though the person I am calling is a few rooms away. :p

I know that at least some hotels won't give out your room number if someone asks for you by name, but they will connect you to the room phone.
Click to expand...

Interesting on the silly international call thing.

That's all this hotel did. Connect a call to her room. The phone system displayed her room number on the calling party's screen. Fail on the phone system installer's part. Do they have $55M?
 
denverpilot said:
Interesting on the silly international call thing.

That's all this hotel did. Connect a call to her room. The phone system displayed her room number on the calling party's screen. Fail on the phone system installer's part. Do they have $55M?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I would say so.
 
weilke said:
Looks like they needed to tighten their supervision of franchisees on security issues. In this case it was a perv stalker, in other cases it may be an ex husband who wants to off his ex to evade alimony etc. I have seen some real sloppy handling of this by different hotels.
Click to expand...

In those scenarios, it doesn't matter what the hotel does. If a murderer knows you're staying in the hotel, they'll happily wait in the parking lot.

This guy wanted photos. The peephole was the problem, not the room he was in nor how he figured out how to socially engineer the phone system.

Permanent fix: Cover the interior side of the peephole.
 
denverpilot said:
In those scenarios, it doesn't matter what the hotel does. If a murderer knows you're staying in the hotel, they'll happily wait in the parking lot.

This guy wanted photos. The peephole was the problem, not the room he was in nor how he figured out how to socially engineer the phone system.

Permanent fix: Cover the interior side of the peephole.
Click to expand...

If I was running a hotel I would have all the peepholes modified with a little hatch that the occupant had to open to peer out. That way, now could use it to peer in.
 
Kristin said:
If I was running a hotel I would have all the peepholes modified with a little hatch that the occupant had to open to peer out. That way, now could use it to peer in.
Click to expand...

Or just give everyone a piece of electrical tape. LOL. Cheaper and just as effective. Call it special "privacy tape". Ha.
 
denverpilot said:
Interesting on the silly international call thing.

That's all this hotel did. Connect a call to her room. The phone system displayed her room number on the calling party's screen. Fail on the phone system installer's part. Do they have $55M?
Click to expand...

That's not exactly all they did. He asked for her by name, they connected the call. That pretty much gave him all the info and confirmation he needed. I called a front desk when we were on a family trip, my folks were in one room and my wife and I were in another. I didn't remember their room number, and my folks don't do those newfangled cell phones. The desk wouldn't give me their room number or even confirm they were guests. Had the front desk just told the guy, "I'm sorry sir, but I can't give out guest information. If you give me a room number I can connect you" their insurance company would have saved millions.

>>>
While waiting for his room, Barrett said he went to the hotel restaurant, where he found a house phone that displays room numbers and called the operator.

“Can I have Erin Andrews’ room?” he recalled asking.

“They connected me,” Barrett continued. “On the house phone it shows a room number, so I knew what room she was in.”
<<<

http://pagesix.com/2016/02/29/erin-andrews-stalker-revealed-his-creepy-peephole-techniques/
 
Matthew said:
That's not exactly all they did. He asked for her by name, they connected the call. That pretty much gave him all the info and confirmation he needed. I called a front desk when we were on a family trip, my folks were in one room and my wife and I were in another. I didn't remember their room number, and my folks don't do those newfangled cell phones. The desk wouldn't give me their room number or even confirm they were guests. Had the front desk just told the guy, "I'm sorry sir, but I can't give out guest information. If you give me a room number I can connect you" their insurance company would have saved millions.

>>>
While waiting for his room, Barrett said he went to the hotel restaurant, where he found a house phone that displays room numbers and called the operator.

“Can I have Erin Andrews’ room?” he recalled asking.

“They connected me,” Barrett continued. “On the house phone it shows a room number, so I knew what room she was in.”
<<<

http://pagesix.com/2016/02/29/erin-andrews-stalker-revealed-his-creepy-peephole-techniques/
Click to expand...

Meh. Hotels have connected outside callers to people by name for decades. Only the advent of the cell phone slowed that.

The real problem was the phone system leaking additional information and that only happens inside the building.

He didn't even need the information that she was staying there, he already knew that.

I can think of at least three or four other ways to socially engineer the hotel to leak her room number. He just had it easy that the phone system displayed the extension number and those matched the room numbers.
 
denverpilot said:
Or just give everyone a piece of electrical tape. LOL. Cheaper and just as effective. Call it special "privacy tape". Ha.
Click to expand...

Then when the claim that the tape fell off and hence was defective, then they get me on strict products liability. No thanks! I little brass shutter than you can swing out of the way to look out would be more sensical.
 
Kristin said:
Then when the claim that the tape fell off and hence was defective, then they get me on strict products liability. No thanks! I little brass shutter than you can swing out of the way to look out would be more sensical.
Click to expand...

A jury would probably find it pretty silly if one argued that tape was defective and one couldn't see that it fell off before disrobing while standing in front of a door.

Nah, I take that back. They didn't find $55M silly. Never mind. That jury was full of idiots, the next one will be also. ;)
 
Kristin said:
Then when the claim that the tape fell off and hence was defective, then they get me on strict products liability. No thanks! I little brass shutter than you can swing out of the way to look out would be more sensical.
Click to expand...
'til then, masking tape and a toothpaste cap.
Kristin said:
Congress has immunized websites, like this one, from illegal stuff that others post on their site without their knowledge or permission. As it needs to be.
Click to expand...
Having trouble with the difference. The hotel didn't seem guilty of anything other than placing a call. Since when is that a bad thing. How's an operator supposed to know who's a celebrity and who isn't?

dtuuri
 
The jury was star-struck.
This was a blatant money grab.
Stupid amount for damages award.
 
NoHeat said:
In the 90s, when Michael Jordan was a sensation, I once stayed at a big hotel where guests whispered that he was staying as well. We tried asking hotel staff if it was true, and they all declined to comment.
Click to expand...

I stayed in a hotel in Beaumont, TX one night. When I was checking in, the young girl behind the counter was excited to tell me a celebrity was going to stay there and was on the way... Nelly. She was shocked when I asked, "Oh, who is she?"
 
Lowflynjack said:
I stayed in a hotel in Beaumont, TX one night. When I was checking in, the young girl behind the counter was excited to tell me a celebrity was going to stay there and was on the way... Nelly. She was shocked when I asked, "Oh, who is she?"
Click to expand...
Nelly ... like in "whoa Nelly!" ? :D
 
dtuuri said:
'til then, masking tape and a toothpaste cap.

Having trouble with the difference. The hotel didn't seem guilty of anything other than placing a call. Since when is that a bad thing. How's an operator supposed to know who's a celebrity and who isn't?

dtuuri
Click to expand...

I didn't sit in on the trial, so I don't know all the evidence that was produced. It has been reported that the hotel's systems and procedures let someone discover what room she was in and gave him a room next to her. I think that the point is that hotels shouldn't identify their guests or the room they are in to third parties, regardless of whether a celebrity is involved or not. That seems to have been the hook that got them. I know from experience that most hotels will not identify their guests, but some do. I am guessing that after this, very few will do so. That is a good thing. Whether this hotel should have been dinged in this case, I don't know, but as a defense lawyer, I could see this coming from the media reports of the trial.
 
Kristin said:
I didn't sit in on the trial, so I don't know all the evidence that was produced. It has been reported that the hotel's systems and procedures let someone discover what room she was in and gave him a room next to her. I think that the point is that hotels shouldn't identify their guests or the room they are in to third parties, regardless of whether a celebrity is involved or not. That seems to have been the hook that got them. I know from experience that most hotels will not identify their guests, but some do. I am guessing that after this, very few will do so. That is a good thing. Whether this hotel should have been dinged in this case, I don't know, but as a defense lawyer, I could see this coming from the media reports of the trial.
Click to expand...

I think as a frequent hotel guest I should thank EA for pursuing this case and the jury for their verdict.
I have no doubt that my (as well as everyone else's) future stays will be a bit safer thanks to them.
 
Humphrey said:
As for the hotel, them paying out about $22.5 million will not be impossible. This large judgment makes news and will ensure that other hotels take measures to prevent something like this happening.
Click to expand...
I doubt it would be possible. Marriot national is out of the suit. So you are looking at recovering against the local franchisee. I doubt there is $22.5 million in coverage, and I doubt the who property is worth $22.5 million. Should she get the whole hotel for this? I don't think so. People have no concept of how much $55 million is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top