[CHRONIC] ESPN's Andrews secretly videotaped nude in hotel

Some of the replies here are fairly grotesque. Yes, it's a lot of money, and it'll be reduced on appeal, but she knows that anyway. This was more about winning the case against individuals who humiliated her.

"Oh, it helped her career." "Oh, she's a gold-digger."

She didn't ask to be secretly taped, and she certainly didn't ask for the video / photos to be posted so millions could see it.

Childish brainless misogynists. Now I see how we might be looking at a President Trump.

 

The situation being secretly videotaped / photographed while one is nude, without the person's consent. No need to add qualifiers to the situation, such as fame or how attractive one is.

Obviously, because Andrews is well-known (moreso than your average woman), there is more news coverage over this, and thus more pressure on the jury / justice system to do something about this.

But just because she's Erin Andrews doesn't mean she should deserve X amount of money more than the next woman.

 

I don't think many here are downplaying her being a rightful victim.

I think they are upset at the award. It's a sign that our justice system is ****ed up to no end.

$55 million is one hell of a statement and there are people who you could argue have suffered way more than her due to negligence and don't see an award close to that. Look at this: http://www.si.com/more-sports/2016/03/07/erin-andrews-wins-55-million-hotel-lawsuit

 

The size of the award is rarely about the victim. It's more about how do you actually punish a defendant enough to change their behavior. For me, personally, it would take far less than $55 million. But for Marriott?

 

What about of hospitals? What about for Government agencies?

You're telling me those large institutions shouldn't be punished as hard as a ****ing hotel chain?

You can piss on the rest of us and call it rain. Let's be clear, her status made the difference in what she was awarded. That's straight up discrimination.

 

I'm not saying that at all.

Governmental agencies often have immunity. Hospitals in Texas are protected by tort reform legislation, so you can't hit them too hard with punitive damages. I have no idea if that's the case in the state where this took place.

 

I doubt the girl on the truck top will get so much.

Glad she won, she deserves it.

DD

 

Because it's a celebrity, you could say the invasion of privacy damages their career and image so it's deserving of more money. But obviously in this case, it didn't really. So a rich celebrity being rewarded that much money for nude videos that some think might have helped her career rubs us normals the wrong way.

She's definitely deserving of money for damages, but not that much. And Marriott deserves punishment for releasing her information to the peeping Tom. I'd put more blame on the employee that did it than the company itself, though.

 

if she didn't bleach her hair blonde would she still get the double nickel?

 

Doesn't work that way. Employees are agents of the employer when they're in the course and scope of their job.

 

Some of your ****heads need to think about what you would feel like if that happened to you, and then think about if it happened to your mother, wife, sister, daughter.

One more pair of t*** on the interwebs to fap to is all you ****s think about.

You don't understand the damage things like this do.

 

So people who just simply think the dollar figure was too high are misogynist? Brilliant deduction guys.

 

I know the damage death can do. There are folks killed in DUIs that don't see 1/4 of this judgment.

 

I'm pretty sure the average compensation for 9-11 survivors and families was way under.

 

Not all people who think that, but definitely the ilk who added up together have the collective brain power of a centipede to try and paint this as opportunistic.

This is clear invasion of privacy, an illegal act of illicit depravity by a sick individual and completely facilitated by the gross negligence of a large corporate chain.

The final dollar figure is taxable anyway, so most of the award goes right back to Uncle Sam.

But I'm sure you and all those people are totally fine with Hulk Hogan suing a media company for $100 million for broadcasting his infidelity. That certainly isn't a desperate money-grab plot from a celebrity with the wherewithal to put the squeeze on a large company.

 

He can sue for whatever he wants when a jury hands it over let me know. It is lucky that she wasn't attacked because of the mistake made by a r****ded front desk person but these damages for what actually happened are really outrageous. If you want to talk about sexism the difference in how the media treated Hogan/Bieber vs Andrews is the real story.

 

I know we all agree she is a beautiful woman but i don't think her butt is her greatest asset (excluding that photo..which looks pretty good).

 

If the company shows gross negligence of its policies or training of employees that results in a pattern, then I'd agree. But if they had a policy to not release confidential information to third parties and one employee willingly broke that rule, then I do not think the company should be held liable for one rogue employee's actions.

 

It's just lawyers negotiating it out and won't be $55M. As everyone knows, it's the perp's fault 51% and he's broke. So we end up with a $27M judgment against 2 companies (the local owner and a multi-hotel management company). Both companies will have GL policies and subrogation clauses and that's the money being used to pay the attorneys now. In the end, multi-billion dollar Lloyd's of London will fund the payment, which will be much less, and will be part of the insurance policy anyways. This shouldn't destroy the functioning hotel...I'm actually curious as to how it will effect everything in terms of operations and how Marriott will react. Now I want to look up what happened to that Waco Twin Peaks owner.