Right, before being peeped on she was just the most-recognized sideline reporter on the biggest sports network in the world.
She would probably like to have been spared the death threats, too.
Go to a different hotel.
According to Wikipedia, Marriott has (as of 2014) almost 700,000 hotel rooms. If they wanted to pay $55 million out cash in six months, they have to raise the cost of their rooms 44c/day (assuming full occupancy, granted)
So no, it’s not big money, and no it doesn’t come out of your pocket, and if you’re worried about it go to a different hotel chain.
During the trial, the perp described his process:
He would unscrew the peephole of a victim’s room (of course, first having listened for her to have left). Then, he used a hack saw to saw off the thread from the peephole device. At that point, it becomes nothing more than a plug with optics.
Having installed the plug, he listened for her shower to go on. And, then off. At which point he’d skulk out into the hall*, remove the peephole/plug, and put his camera in the hole and start filming.
(*No doubt it helped that his and her rooms were set off from the main hallway - basically in an alcove or corner. This meant that even when he was standing outside of her room with his camera pushed into her peephole hole, he could not be seen by anyone in the main hallway.)
Or so I read last week.
Ah. Well, color me surprised that (a) it is possible to disassemble a peephole just from the hallway side and (b) he was able to stand by the door for minutes at a time without attracting attention, even if off the main corridor.
I stand by my limited “outlaw” suggestion, though, granting the very specific right for her to kill him if he comes near her again, as long as she doesn’t take out any innocent bystanders. It’s kind of how I feel about obsessed stalkers - he may simply not be psychologically able to leave her alone, but it’s not her responsibility to simply up with him.
I suggest having your privacy violated is bigger than an inconvenience. There is a…weight…to being victimized that I can’t explain. Anyway, I doubt we are going to have a meeting of the minds on this one.
Couple things…
Marriott is not a defendant. Just the local hotel owner / management group and the stalker guy.
Jury found Stalker guy 51% at fault. Hotel group 49%. Stalker won’t be able to pay his share and that’ll pretty much be that. Leaves about $22 million possible Andrews can get from hotel group and that’ll depend on their insurance coverage limits. 22million seems high, but Marriott probably makes hotel owners carry high limits. This will settle out of court during appeal.
For those who say she deserves every penny of the $55 million - what exactly were her damages? I’m just trying to figure out what violation could legitimately warrant such a hefty price tag.
The brief articles I’ve seen so far haven’t indicated that any of it was punitive against Marriott, so I assume $55 million is supposed to represent her actual damages. Please explain it to me.
It doesn’t matter, by your own description. I could suffer what is in your eyes the most trivial of inconveniences, but if I say it’s a trauma worth $55 million in damages, then by your description you have no right to question the severity of it.
This is not a critical point, I admit. Andrews has my sympathy and her stalker should and did go to jail (and I’ve described how I’m okay with her having an enhanced level of self-defense at her disposal should he approach her again, i.e. she can go immediately to lethal force) but even 49% of $55 million strikes me as extravagant, and I do feel I have the right to question it - though of course no authority to affect it.
Yeah, nothing says “entitled” like not wanting your nude videos splashed all over the internet.
Extremely grainy pics that could basically be anyone if they hadn’t been “verified” as being of this particular person.
As it turns out, humans all have the same basic anatomy. Although feeling embarrassed about one’s naked body is common and probably mostly socially induced, it is not in fact a life-shattering problem.
By the way, if the victim here had been a man would people still be saying he “deserves every penny”?
I have been curious about this. Stalker won’t have to pay, because he can’t? What’s the point of the penalty, then?
Victim shaming much?
This does not involve the Marriott hotel chain. Even though they use the Marriott name, they are not part of the chain. The settlement applies solely to the one hotel, not the whole chain.
Just asking: is this actually true? Corporate has no obligation when its franchisees screw up? Would think liability would carry up the financial chain.
As for the amount: she wasn’t “given” what “she asked for.” She was awarded what a jury decided she deserved.
Speaking as someone who has worked at hotels for over a decade, I think it’s wonderful.
People act like complete assholes when I refuse to tell them their parent’s room number (“They’re my parents you can tell me their room number!” Oh, because you say they’re your parents and it’s o.k. I’m supposed to know it’s actually o.k.?) or that I won’t let them into their friend’s room to get the thing that they left in there. This happens extremely frequently, especially with weddings, “We were all in Rm 408 getting ready for the wedding and I left my phone in there, it’s my friend’s room but he’s at the reception and I have no idea when he’ll be back, what if I call him and you can talk to him and he’ll tell you it’s o.k. for me to get into the room???”
It’s completely fucking amazing to me that so many people think that these are reasonable requests and that they’re outraged when I refuse. You know what, I’m sure that 99% of the time (or more) that it actually is exactly as they say it is. That they are sharing the room and want a key so they can get in without waking anybody/want to decorate their sister’s room as a surprise for her birthday/left something in the room when visiting earlier. I’m not refusing the request because I think you’re lying, I’m refusing the request because the consequences of me making a bad call are astronomically fucking terrible!!!
So, I love it that there is a very highly publicized expensive lawsuit in the news.
Maybe, just maybe, it will drill into some people’s thick heads why I can’t give out personal information about any guests.
P.S. If you come to the front desk and ask me to dial a guest’s room, you can easily peek at the phone screen and see the room number (if you didn’t catch it by watching my fingers as I dialed). This is why, if you come to the front desk and ask me to dial a guest’s room, I direct you to the lobby house phone 10 feet away and instruct you to pick it up- the house phone rings me at the front desk, I connect the call to the guest you’re asking for, and you can ask them to tell you the room number (it doesn’t display on the house phone that you’d be using). So it doesn’t matter that this guy “tricked” the hotel. Such tricks are to be anticipated and accounted for by basic security measures.
This thread is disgusting, especially the post implying that because she wore a dance costume (!), she clearly does not have any claim to privacy. Good grief.
I’ve worked at a hotel. We would NEVER connect a call to a room based on just a name. Either you know their room number, or you aren’t getting through. We also wouldn’t honor room requests willy-nilly, and having a special request the day of (rather than when booking) would be a red flag.
You don’t have to be a celebrity (minor or not, because apparently that somehow matters to the OP) to have a stalker, and people try to harass hotel guests all the time. In our case, it was mostly various types of romantic partners trying to bring their drama into our hotel. It happened all the time, and we took our guests privacy seriously. It’s one of the most basic jobs a hotel has.
Not to sound unsympathetic, but this really worth a thousand times the average American yearly household income?
Another perspective: Haven’t there been civil lawsuits involving death, that resulted in someone being awarded less than $55 million?
What happened to Erin Andrews was terrible, no doubt, but does it deserve greater financial compensation than ***death ***itself?
We’ve reached peak dirty old man here, folks.