Hotel ownership employee views Erin Andrews video ... - Page 3

ChynnaBlue · ‎05-22-2012

@hoosieroriginal wrote:
Now, if I was on the jury, this would cause me to give Erin her $75 mil. I can't believe, during the trial, someone involved with the hotel would do something like this (or allow himself to be around someone else viewing the video - unconscionable. I thought I heard last night he is also on the witness list (but I don't believe article confirms that). I hope the jury hears about this.

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2016/03/03/hotel-ownership-employee-apologizes-watching-eri...

I agree. That just shows how absolutely right she is about the whole thing. They allowed her to be victimized and that opened her up to being repeatedly victimized.

The guy who did this to her served 30 months in jail and she's got a life sentence of public shaming and humiliation. Terrible.

Click here for Forum Tips

ChynnaBlue · ‎05-22-2012

@brii wrote:
I'm sure a lot of people have watched the video since the trial started.

And everyone single one of them is a sad excuse of a human.

Click here for Forum Tips

hoosieroriginal · ‎03-04-2012

@kdgn wrote:
According to TMZ, her legal team wants to put the man back on the stand because of what happened in the restaurant. It could be a disaster for Marriot because of her claim that she's haunted by the video wherever she goes. This would definitely prove her point.

Here he is, a Marriot executive, playing the video in a public setting right in the middle of the trial.

@kdgn - I so hope that happens. Let someone from Marriott see what it's like to be shamed in public!

santorini · ‎03-09-2010

What is on this video? Is she just walking past the door?

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

@santorini wrote:
What is on this video? Is she just walking past the door?

No. The man was a peeping Tom, followed her around from city to city and managed to tape her while she was in the "privacy" of her room - undressed getting out of the shower.

At first I thought her claim was excessive - but after what this guy pulled - OUT IN PUBLIC - I think she deserves every penny.

Tinkrbl44 · ‎08-23-2010

It's my understanding that, with franchise ownership, you are contractually obligated to adhere to the standards of the parent company. After all, McDonalds doesn't want to sell someone a franchise and then that owner goes rouge with substandard meals.

I'm just glad the server brought this to light!

It will be interesting to see if this guy loses his job if the hotel has to pay big bucks.

chrystaltree · ‎05-10-2010

He isn't on the jury and he already tesitifed. Why the heck shouldn't he look at the video if he wanted to? How would that justify that obscene amount of money or any amount of money at all from the hotel? Perhaps I missed it but I still haven't seen any evidence showing that the hotel was responsible for the actions of the pervert or negligent in any way. Actually, considering the case, I would have assumed he would have seen the video before he testified. The jurors won't hear about it.

MaggieMack · ‎10-01-2014

The jurors certainly can hear about it. It's as close as their internet, they are NOT sequestered. If I was an unsequestered juror, I would be browsing.

No act of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted. - Aesop

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

@chrystaltree wrote:
He isn't on the jury and he already tesitifed. Why the heck shouldn't he look at the video if he wanted to? How would that justify that obscene amount of money or any amount of money at all from the hotel? Perhaps I missed it but I still haven't seen any evidence showing that the hotel was responsible for the actions of the pervert or negligent in any way. Actually, considering the case, I would have assumed he would have seen the video before he testified. The jurors won't hear about it.

He told the Marriott front desk that he wanted the room next to Erin and they complied. They didn't ask him for any credentials or any proof he was in any way related to her.

That could happen to ANY ONE OF US (not that a pervert is going to want a room next to 61 year old ME!). Hotels are supposed to protect the privacy of their guests. This guy, BTW, tried this in many other cities - he followed her around. He tried this in my city when she was here for a sports event.

A guy who would ogle and comment on the body of a woman IN PUBLIC who is suing the company he represents is a pig, a fool, and a pervert himself. He is compounding her anguish and proving she is right about the ongoing harm this invasion of her privacy has caused her. That video will live on forever.

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

@MaggieMack wrote:
The jurors certainly can hear about it. It's as close as their internet, they are NOT sequestered. If I was an unsequestered juror, I would be browsing.

I remember when I was on a jury trial that lasted for a week, we were told NOT to read the paper or watch the local news.