Erin Andrews - Awarded $55M

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I think that the hotel and the filmer totally did something wrong. I was raised with good morals and filming someone nude who is unaware of it is disgusting and sleezy and no one should ever do that.





My take on this thread has simply been that the victim may or may not thinks its a big deal. It may affect them in a huge way. They may be traumatized, and need counseling for years and years to overcome this violation and no amount of money would be enough. Or the victim might not think that being nude in a blurry 10 second video is a big deal and might just shrug it off and be totally stoked about getting millions for something that doesn't even bother them that much in the first place.

Some in this thread are acting as if the only outcome is the victim feeling violated, destroyed, sullied, embarrassed, outraged, etc. I think that is untrue.

It was asked in this very thread "How would you feel if this was your sister, mom, daughter that this happened to." Well it would 100% depend on how my sister, daughter, mom reacted to this happening to them.
If my daughter were to be filmed nude through a keyhole totally unaware and then called me up crying and her life was just ruined and she was going to need therapy to help her cope then i would feel just horrible and be extremely angry and the payout to her could never be enough.

If she called me up crying and felt a bit embarrassed and saddened and her and i were able to talk about it and she was able to move on without any long term damage to her then i would feel a little upset about the situation but happy that my daughter was going to be fine going forward and also I would no longer have to worry about her financial stability.

If she called me up and happily said "Dad guess what,? Some dumbass filmed me nude through a keyhole and now i get millions and millions of dollars!" and seemed to not only be totally ok with what happened but even glad because now she was rich over something that was not a big deal to her anyways, Then i would be happy for her.

Me personally, i dont think of being nude as a big deal. I have no problem with people seeing me nude. wanted or unwanted. I could totally live in a nudist colony. I sleep nude. I have no problem walking through the house nude. There are others out there like me as well. My daughter is going to grow up around me and I plan on teaching her about sexuality and the human body and hope to teach her that there is nothing to be ashamed of with these topics. Hopefully if this exact scenario played out with my daughter it would not affect her even a little bit and she would call me up to tell how she gets paid millions and millions of dollars all because some idiot filmed her through a keyhole.
I hope my daughter would not be traumatized by something like this... Hopefully she will be able to see the big picture and realize that some random people seeing her blurry nude body for 10 seconds is not something that should make her feel bad about herself. Hopefully she wouldn't feel like a victim. Again, if she did feel violated, traumatized, and it emotionally messed her up then i would be mad as hell and want to kill the mo fos responsible and no amount of money would be enough.

My whole point in this thread is that not every woman is the same. There are different ways to react to this violation and none are the right or wrong way to react.

The world would be a better place if it was filled with a lot more fish.

 

[Gameface]

Fish, no one is saying that there is no other option than to be devastated. Andrews has stated in detail how this has affected her and she claims that it was devastating. So for her, it wasn't just no big deal. She said that long before she got a judgement for millions.

So to keep pounding the point home that maybe she didn't mind, that some women show their bodies and it's no big deal, you're minimizing how she says it affected her. Like she's just a big 'ol wimp for not sucking it up and shrugging it off, because other, better women would have dealt with it better.

I get what you're saying. I just don't get why you want to keep saying it.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Fish, no one is saying that there is no other option than to be devastated. Andrews has stated in detail how this has affected her and she claims that it was devastating. So for her, it wasn't just no big deal. She said that long before she got a judgement for millions.

So to keep pounding the point home that maybe she didn't mind, that some women show their bodies and it's no big deal, you're minimizing how she says it affected her. Like she's just a big 'ol wimp for not sucking it up and shrugging it off, because other, better women would have dealt with it better.

I get what you're saying. I just don't get why you want to keep saying it.

Do you find it at all ironic that many of the same people who are saying that our sex education system and our societal attitudes toward sex are so outdated (I agree with them, BTW) are also saying that this particular violation of sexuality is deserving of a huge financial award at the expense of a company that was tangentially involved?

I believe Andrews testimony when she says that this has impacted her so negatively, but I think that many people experience much, much worse violations every single day. I think the course that this case has taken is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[b_line]

Do you find it at all ironic that many of the same people who are saying that our sex education system and our societal attitudes toward sex are so outdated (I agree with them, BTW) are also saying that this particular violation of sexuality is deserving of a huge financial award at the expense of a company that was tangentially involved?

I believe Andrews testimony when she says that this has impacted her so negatively, but I think that many people experience much, much worse violations every single day. I think the course that this case has taken is absolutely ridiculous.

Do you agree that the financial award was not just for some crap that happened to her though? That it is being used as a guarantee that hotels will change the way they protect their clients?

If it was only about her, it's way overkill. It's about the rest of the country's rights though.

 

[Gameface]

Do you find it at all ironic that many of the same people who are saying that our sex education system and our societal attitudes toward sex are so outdated (I agree with them, BTW) are also saying that this particular violation of sexuality is deserving of a huge financial award at the expense of a company that was tangentially involved?

I believe Andrews testimony when she says that this has impacted her so negatively, but I think that many people experience much, much worse violations every single day. I think the course that this case has taken is absolutely ridiculous.

If a hotel employee doesn't divulge information about one of their guests and then book the person asking into an adjacent room than this doesn't happen. Not then and not there, anyway. So the fact that it happened is the direct result of what the hotel employee did. I think Andrews has every right to hold the hotel responsible for their direct, not tangential, involvement in this violation of her privacy. I don't have any idea if the amount awarded is reasonable. It's a hell of a lot of money. I'm guessing that if it were any of our wives or daughters the ruling wouldn't be a tenth as large. But I'm not privy to what damages she claimed or how the jury evaluated those claims.

I don't think it has anything at all to do with sexual progressiveness. I think it has to do with privacy. And since you're equating sexual progressiveness with taking nude photos of someone who is unaware that they are being observed in a situation where they assume that they are in a private place, I question what you think sexual progressiveness means. Does it mean that eventually we can take whatever sexual satisfaction we want from other people without their consent? I don't think that's what it means at all.

 

[fishonjazz]

Fish, no one is saying that there is no other option than to be devastated. Andrews has stated in detail how this has affected her and she claims that it was devastating. So for her, it wasn't just no big deal. She said that long before she got a judgement for millions.

So to keep pounding the point home that maybe she didn't mind, that some women show their bodies and it's no big deal, you're minimizing how she says it affected her. Like she's just a big 'ol wimp for not sucking it up and shrugging it off, because other, better women would have dealt with it better.

I get what you're saying. I just don't get why you want to keep saying it.

Because I came out early in this thread and said that 55 million over that lame video seems like too much to me. Again from my perspective it is. Then I got bashed for that opinion. So I was defending it.

I saw that CL said that it will be more like 6-9 million. If that were what the title of the thread said then I wouldn't have enough opened this thread.
I just felt like 55 million was allot for that video. That's just my opinion and apparently having that opinion makes me a bad, uncaring, insensitive person to some people.

Would have been interesting if Andrews addressed the media after the incident by saying "so what, some douche made a lame video of me. I don't really care." I bet some people would have been mad at her for not displaying disgust and victim characteristics. That's the society we live in. Everyone is a victim. Spill coffee on your lap and you are a victim right?

 

[fishonjazz]

Do you agree that the financial award was not just for some crap that happened to her though? That it is being used as a guarantee that hotels will change the way they protect their clients?

If it was only about her, it's way overkill. It's about the rest of the country's rights though.

Do you think that the owner of the hotel could have prevented this?

Should the hotel owner never leave the hotel and never sleep and follow their employees around day and night to make sure this doesn't happen again? Talk about micro managing!

I don't think there is any way to prevent this from happening again

 

[Gameface]

Because I came out early in this thread and said that 55 million over that lame video seems like too much to me. Again from my perspective it is. Then I got bashed for that opinion. So I was defending it.

I saw that CL said that it will be more like 6-9 million. If that were what the title of the thread said then I wouldn't have enough opened this thread.
I just felt like 55 million was allot for that video. That's just my opinion and apparently having that opinion makes me a bad, uncaring, insensitive person to some people.

Would have been interesting if Andrews addressed the media after the incident by saying "so what, some douche made a lame video of me. I don't really care." I bet some people would have been mad at her for not displaying disgust and victim characteristics. That's the society we live in. Everyone is a victim. Spill coffee on your lap and you are a victim right?

I don't think you're a bad person.

The award she got has nothing to do with what she deserves. That's been said many times.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Do you agree that the financial award was not just for some crap that happened to her though? That it is being used as a guarantee that hotels will change the way they protect their clients?

If it was only about her, it's way overkill. It's about the rest of the country's rights though.

I think I've made my opinion on this crystal clear already but I will say it one more time. This employee made an obvious mistake. I am stunned that, even without training, any hotel employee would be stupid enough to make a mistake like that. So we fine the hotel chain, which in my opinion is only tangentially involved, a massive amount of money to make sure this never happens again.

Next time the stalker will walk into the hotel behind the victim, and they will overhear the desk clerk giving the room number to their target, then they will approach the desk with some story about how they have a lucky number (which just happens to be the same as the room adjacent to the person they are stalking) and they will succeed in getting their own crappy video which they will spread around for the world to see. So there will be another case, only this time the lawyers will go for five times the damages they got this time because obviously the owners of the hotel chain did not learn their lesson.

All hotel lobbies will eventually have to be redesigned so that we step into private rooms to close our business, and it will be similar to a mortgage where we sign all sorts of disclosures and present multiple forms of ID and have our credit pulled and take our shoes off and go through all manner of violations so that we don't find ourselves being violated. And every member of the party will be required to have their fingerprints taken and leave a DNA sample. One of the disclosures will remind us that we are not allowed to stick a video camera in the keyhole and another one will make sure we're aware that we're not allowed to leave bugging devices behind in the room, and there will be one to remind us to have our drapes fully closed if we are going to be nude for even an instant. And we will be asked if we want to consult with a lawyer before signing any of them. And the cost of the room will have dramatically risen from the good old days when we used to just spontaneously take a vacation without the need of registering our itinerary with the Transportation Board and submitted all of the necessary forms to the Entertainment Commission. But we will all be okay with these costs because we will understand that things are now so much safer than those days when the hotel chains practically encouraged stalkers to video their victims through the keyholes. God Bless America!

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

If a hotel employee doesn't divulge information about one of their guests and then book the person asking into an adjacent room than this doesn't happen. Not then and not there, anyway. So the fact that it happened is the direct result of what the hotel employee did. I think Andrews has every right to hold the hotel responsible for their direct, not tangential, involvement in this violation of her privacy. I don't have any idea if the amount awarded is reasonable. It's a hell of a lot of money. I'm guessing that if it were any of our wives or daughters the ruling wouldn't be a tenth as large. But I'm not privy to what damages she claimed or how the jury evaluated those claims.

I don't think it has anything at all to do with sexual progressiveness. I think it has to do with privacy. And since you're equating sexual progressiveness with taking nude photos of someone who is unaware that they are being observed in a situation where they assume that they are in a private place, I question what you think sexual progressiveness means. Does it mean that eventually we can take whatever sexual satisfaction we want from other people without their consent? I don't think that's what it means at all.

Good God. Did someone pull the bathtub plug and allow all of the common sense to drain out of this discussion?

 

[Gameface]

Good God. Did someone pull the bathtub plug and allow all of the common sense to drain out of this discussion?

Yeah, it seems like it. You've been raving mad pretty much the entire time. This settlement is ruining America. Holding people liable for their actions is some sort of horror.

Do you find it at all ironic that many of the same people who are saying that our sex education system and our societal attitudes toward sex are so outdated (I agree with them, BTW) are also saying that this particular violation of sexuality is deserving of a huge financial award at the expense of a company that was tangentially involved?

You said that. You want to question common sense?

Once again you're saying Andrews didn't deserve that award. Can you please get a ****ing clue? It has nothing to do with what she deserves. If you can't understand that then that's on you. It's basic ****.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Yeah, it seems like it. You've been raving mad pretty much the entire time. This settlement is ruining America. Holding people liable for their actions is some sort of horror.



You said that. You want to question common sense?

Once again you're saying Andrews didn't deserve that award. Can you please get a ****ing clue? It has nothing to do with what she deserves. If you can't understand that then that's on you. It's basic ****.

Wow.

 

[Gameface]

Okay, in trying to find the breakdown between the compensatory damages and punitive damages it seems like there were no punitive damages. If someone can find something that says otherwise I'd be interested.

That actually changes my view of the award a lot. 55mil is ridiculous for compensatory damages. Very hard to understand how she could have suffered 55mil worth of quantifiable damages.

Also, in reading stuff to try to find punitive damages I read some details (unverified) about what happened. Someone in the legal section on reddit said that the stalker simply asked to be connected to Erin Andrews phone, which is normal. He then used a "hack" that allowed him to decode her room number from that phone connection. So it appears he didn't ask for and receive the room number from a hotel employee. He acquired the room number through deceitful means. He then sawed a hole into the adjoining door, which clearly wasn't with the consent of the hotel.

Those facts change my mind. Would have been pretty cool if the people up in arms over this would have provided any. But I get the feeling, Joe, that even without those details you'd still think this was ruining America.

 

[fishonjazz]

If the law/court system/justice system wanted to really try to prevent something like this from happening again then they would put the guy who made the film and the hotel employee in prison.

I don't see how taking money from someone who had no involvement in the crime helps to prevent this from happening again.

The amount awarded to Andrews could be 10 billion dollars and yet the next time ariana grande was seen checking into a Hilton by a perverted papparazzi trying to make a buck this same thing would happen again.

Though the 10 billion dollar penalty levied to the hotel might serve to get the hotel shut down and bankrupt and cause hundreds of people to lose their jobs, so at least that good could come from it I guess

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Okay, in trying to find the breakdown between the compensatory damages and punitive damages it seems like there were no punitive damages. If someone can find something that says otherwise I'd be interested.

That actually changes my view of the award a lot. 55mil is ridiculous for compensatory damages. Very hard to understand how she could have suffered 55mil worth of quantifiable damages.

Also, in reading stuff to try to find punitive damages I read some details (unverified) about what happened. Someone in the legal section on reddit said that the stalker simply asked to be connected to Erin Andrews phone, which is normal. He then used a "hack" that allowed him to decode her room number from that phone connection. So it appears he didn't ask for and receive the room number from a hotel employee. He acquired the room number through deceitful means. He then sawed a hole into the adjoining door, which clearly wasn't with the consent of the hotel.

Those facts change my mind. Would have been pretty cool if the people up in arms over this would have provided any. But I get the feeling, Joe, that even without those details you'd still think this was ruining America.

You think my opinion is going to change as a result of your post? Uhh... no.

I think that common sense has been thrown out the window, and I think the vast majority of lawyers are thrilled about that.

 

[♪alt13]

If the law/court system/justice system wanted to really try to prevent something like this from happening again then they would put the guy who made the film and the hotel employee in prison.

I don't see how taking money from someone who had no involvement in the crime helps to prevent this from happening again.

The amount awarded to Andrews could be 10 billion dollars and yet the next time ariana grande was seen checking into a Hilton by a perverted papparazzi trying to make a buck this same thing would happen again.

Though the 10 billion dollar penalty levied to the hotel might serve to get the hotel shut down and bankrupt and cause hundreds of people to lose their jobs, so at least that good could come from it I guess

Wait the dude was charged for some sort of voyeurism crime, right? I mean he should have been. Isn't filming someone without their knowledge(like in a bathroom) a sex crime? Sounds like they could have thrown in vandalism. This dude had to go to jail, right?

 

[fishonjazz]

Wait the dude was charged for some sort of voyeurism crime, right? I mean he should have been. Isn't filming someone without their knowledge(like in a bathroom) a sex crime? Sounds like they could have thrown in vandalism. This dude had to go to jail, right?

I would think so but another perv/vouyer/papparazzi out there reading about this might not see anything but a hotel getting charged big bucks and not be deterred.


In fact the 55 million dollar headline could have the opposite effect and rather than make this type thing happen less, actually increase the frequency of this type of a thing occurring.

I could imagine some lower level celebrity who wants more fame and more money see what happened here and try to devise a way for this same thing to happen to them in hopes of getting more fame and money.

 

[♪alt13]

I would think so but another perv/vouyer/papparazzi out there reading about this might not see anything but a hotel getting charged big bucks and not be deterred.


In fact the 55 million dollar headline could have the opposite effect and rather than make this type thing happen less, actually increase the frequency of this type of a thing occurring.

I could imagine some lower level celebrity who wants more fame and more money see what happened here and try to devise a way for this same thing to happen to them in hopes of getting more fame and money.

Looks like the guy spent 2 and half years in prison with 3 years probation.

https://espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=4998324

It says he may face charges for doing this to at least 12 other women. If they found those victims this could get real expensive for the hotels involved.

 

[fishonjazz]

Looks like the guy spent 2 and half years in prison with 3 years probation.

https://espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=4998324

It says he may face charges for doing this to at least 12 other women. If they found those victims this could get real expensive for the hotels involved.

Damn what a perverted a hole.
Hopefully he gets convicted on those other times he did this too.

Andrews sounds like this event really ****ed her up too and she will never recover. I feel bad for her.

 

[Gameface]

You think my opinion is going to change as a result of your post? Uhh... no.

I think that common sense has been thrown out the window, and I think the vast majority of lawyers are thrilled about that.

My opinion changed...