OT: Erin Andrews Awarded $55 M in Video Stalker Case
- Thread starter Source
- Start date
If it was only 250k what incentive would the mayor have to correct their behavior? 250k is nothing to a business that big. The penalty should actually hurt the business in a meaningful way.
Thought it was crazy to hit the Hotel like that until I saw the facts. Not sure I would say they were half at fault but I think they deserve some penalty. What I didn't like was that (supposedly) at least one jury member asked her and got her autograph. Not exactly what I would call impartial behavior.
Oh come on now. This award is ridiculous and you know it. BTW.. what a great human you are, wishing this on innocents because of my opinion that 55 million dollars is as ridiculous as what I said. Clearly what I said was meant to be provocative and indicative that this did not hurt Andrews career at all... if anything it helped it. Saying so shouldn't result in threats of "peeping" against innocents.
Put the peeper in jail and since he claimed it was for financial gain, hammer him with fines and payments to Andrews... but have some sense of scale to it. Erin Andrews asking for $75 Million is insane.
If the hotel did honor a request to be next to Andrews, the employee did something wrong and the hotel did not train him or her properly. So some penalty is in order. Buthave some scale to it. The negative PR is significant... why should Erin Andrews and her lawyers benefit so much?
But then you have Andrews saying ESPN forced her to go on Oprah and talk about this. If that is true, why not have ESPN pay Andrews something for that ridiculous demand?
After this event she went on to be on Dancing with the Stars and then host same program. Maybe Brooke Burke, who Andrews replaced, should sue Marriott and the Peeper.
Sorry, you simply don't get it. I guarantee you that Andrews would gladly give up all the money in the world to have not been stalked and violated like that.
I agree. There should be zero punishment for his crimes, since it resulted in a financial gain for her. I also, using your logic, propose that those behind the 9/11 hijackings receive no penalty, since the verdict resulted in fame and fortune for some of the widows.
What an idiotic post.
$55m, what a joke.
People are starving and she gets that kind of money.
People are starving and she gets that kind of money.
55 million is excessive as hell and I don't agree with a judgement that size but for you to say she should be paying the peeper is disgusting and hey maybe you're loved ones could also benefit from the exposure they could go from jobless to porn star who knows. Sick response and u just don't get it, I'm sure u would tho if it happened to your family which I obviously do not wish since it's messed up, but that's probably the only way someone like u would understand what's that like, poor girl prob constantly thinks soneone could be watching her through a peep hole at every hotel she's at
Fathers, if someone did this to your daughters, how would you feel about punishing the parties with this judgement/award? That said, in a more perfect world, Andrews would donate the award to or establish a foundation to aid victims of abuse. I suspect that won't happen here, though. Crocodile tears?
Counselor, if they get scaled way back anyway, why start out at such an absurd figure in the first place?
Thanks for saving me the trouble - very succinct and correct.
I'm not sure which of those comments is most embarrassing, but I'm landing somewhere between REDPOS and Good Ol' Boy.
There was a standard of care that is expected as a guest, and that standard was not met. What did they do to warrant this? They released her room information to someone they did not verify. They put someone next to her that specifically asked to be next to her and never checked with her. If that standard was acceptable, than any Tom, Dick or Harry could walk into a hotel where they new some they were stalking was in and be placed in an adjoining room. They violated a standard of care - security, trust, safety. I would say that this was decided just right!
thats fine.... but 55 million? Thats the joke.. People get killed or sent to jail when innocent and get less... Wheres the logic? Again unless there was some real gross negligence, i dont see how the hotel should have to pay more than 1 million.
You are mixing criminal and civil trials. Civil law verdicts are not views in totality or in relation to other contexts... this was one case and once case only. It was a case of gross negligence. And in the case, the negligence was gross.
That is not to say that juries are not swayed by various factors that work for or against a defendant or plaintiff... but you cannot and should not compare settlements.
I would want the perpetrator tarred and feathered for the rest of his life. Seriously, he should be in jail for a long, long time, and he should be constantly tracked once he's released. And he should never have any financial gain from this.
Must be thinking of someone else.
You brought up what Kardashian does for free as a counterpoint to the settlement. The difference is consent. Kanye likes a finger in his stinkhole. If someone puts a finger there without your consent you should get the same damages or would you let it slide because Kanye likes it?
Last edited:
I always found the timing to be very good for her. It was just shortly after where she had her locker room photo spread.
My lawyer friends are really up in arms over this judgement. Wrongful death suits where a child dies typically get judgments for ~$5mm. How is this a reasonable amount?
Btw-?i am fine with the judgement. This dude and hotel are at fault but...please, she appeared half naked the following month in a locker room photo shoot It isn't the same as my mother, daughter, wife.
To clarify, she has as much rights to privacy, I am just saying, it is not quite as devistating to her persona.
To clarify, she has as much rights to privacy, I am just saying, it is not quite as devistating to her persona.
Damages are based on harm. I wasn't there (and neither were any of us), but presumably she showed two kinds of harm - the harm to her career and the harm to her as a person. Someone with a very valuable career can be damaged much more than someone who makes sandwiches at Subway.
The same principle is true in other lawsuits. If I sue you over a $100,000 contract that you failed to perform, I can't get the same damages that I could get if I sue you over a $100,000,000 contract.
I'm willing to bet most of us would prefer they saw our Rivals posts over the rest of our internet activity.
What makes me think 55 million for her life being ruined is to high is, how she acts in her life and career. When she was a contestant on dancing with the stars, she had no problem flaunting herself in suggestive dances without any signs of being a 'shell of her former self'. As the host of dancing with the stars she is all smiles, jokes around a lot etc.
If she was truly 55 million damaged, she would not want to be seen on tv and she would be a train wreck and would require medicine and a psychologist and would cover her body and just start crying suddenly. She acted like that during the trial.
If she was truly 55 million damaged, she would not want to be seen on tv and she would be a train wreck and would require medicine and a psychologist and would cover her body and just start crying suddenly. She acted like that during the trial.
I feel bad for Erin but I wouldn't mind seeing those pics. And since my mom and wife know I was a total womanizer until I got married, I'd show them this post. I really think some of us on this board take these posts too seriously.
How does $55m help her with her emotional pain? Only way I think the award makes any sense is if she spends every cent on programs that help women that are the victim of abuse/mistreatment. If not, it's just a money grab.
The problem, of course, is that money can't fully compensate somebody for emotional pain, but it's also not like the court can magically make the pain go away.
Erin Andrews won't get most of that $55 million jury award:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/08/med...?iid=ob_lockedrail_topeditorial&iid=obnetwork
http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/08/med...?iid=ob_lockedrail_topeditorial&iid=obnetwork
I'm ok with the damages awarded. Though, she most likely isn't going to see any of it from the stalker. The hotel did not provide her with the security and privacy expected as a customer.
I just don't see how it adversely effected her career. She is more popular then ever and as I said,I think I saw more of her in her photo spread that same month then I did in the video.
How it effects her as a woman and person? No one can make that determination.
I just don't see how it adversely effected her career. She is more popular then ever and as I said,I think I saw more of her in her photo spread that same month then I did in the video.
How it effects her as a woman and person? No one can make that determination.
I agree with "idiotic" if it applies to your post.
I said the peeper should go to jail and there should be some penalty for the hotel to ensure they train their staff better. But asking for $75M and getting a $55M judgement is ridiculous. It might be unpopular to suggest that Erin Andrews benefited financially but it happens to be true. My initial post suggesting Andrews pay the peeper and the hotel was clearly meant to indicate that she gained financially and that the award was ridiculous. It was not a serious suggestion. By Andrews' own account, her own employer, ESPN, thought she might have cooperated in making and releasing this video for her own purposes.
Why should anyone be criticized for saying this award was ridiculous? Are you going to do the same thing to whatever court decides the same and reduces the award?
Oh.. so you said something just for shock value to make a point.. but you criticized me for doing the same thing.
Got it.
GOR: What about all the emotional stress? The persistent fear that you're never safe? The distress knowing that your privates are "out there" for eternity for all the world to see?
There's honestly no price on a person's well-being/emotional state/honor. Something like that changes you forever.
Especially for someone who makes their living in front of the camera.
There's honestly no price on a person's well-being/emotional state/honor. Something like that changes you forever.
Especially for someone who makes their living in front of the camera.
As I said above, you still don't get it. Saying, "Erin Andrews BENEFITED from that "exposure". She should have to pay the peeper and Marriott for making it all possible," implying that it's ok to stalk, violate and terrorize someone else, as long as they get paid for it, is douchebaggery of the highest order.
Sure, $55 million is a crazy number and it's fine to say that number is crazy as long as you don't say the mean-spirited things you said in addition to that. With regard to the large number, though, it may be the only thing that might change the policies and procedures at this hotel chain (and others who see the judgment). And if she gets many millions out of this, let's see what she does with it before criticizing her for it - my guess is she'll donate quite a bit of it.
