• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Erin Andrews 911 call

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
3chordcharlie said:
With respect to Ms. Andrews, who is absolutely in the right here, the actual amount of this award is kind of a joke.
Click to expand...

Agreed. What are her actual, provable damages? She was pretty much a sideline reporter at the time IIRC, now she's the host of a show. While she left ESPN shortly after the incident, her career hasn't exactly suffered...I don't watch her show because I don't get that channel but I see her on ProBiotics commercials regularly. It could certainly be argued that the incident raised her visibility and gave her much sympathy in the public eye and may have actually helped her career overall. I have no problem with her getting compensation for having her privacy violated and him getting jailed for it, but the award amount is way out of line.
 
Anubis said:
"famous " is a bit of a lie
shes famous now because she was filmed in the nude

I had no idea who she was before this happened and TBH im not sure I could pick he out of a lineup now
Click to expand...

Uhhh he filmed her in 2008.
She had already been at ESPN for 4 years at that point. She was already a (minor) celebrity at that point.

Did you hear about the filming of her in the nude when the film was released or when she sued?
 
SearchMaster said:
Agreed. What are her actual, provable damages? She was pretty much a sideline reporter at the time IIRC, now she's the host of a show. While she left ESPN shortly after the incident, her career hasn't exactly suffered...I don't watch her show because I don't get that channel but I see her on ProBiotics commercials regularly. It could certainly be argued that the incident raised her visibility and gave her much sympathy in the public eye and may have actually helped her career overall. I have no problem with her getting compensation for having her privacy violated and him getting jailed for it, but the award amount is way out of line.
Click to expand...

They did argue that she has done better now, but the jury decided anyway. Maybe the jury is accounting for her cut of it after all the money gets spread out too. 😉
 
Homerboy said:
Did you hear about the filming of her in the nude when the film was released or when she sued?
Click to expand...

I prob heard about it years ago and forgot 100% about it, TBh I may have 100% missed it and only heard about it nowish because of the lawsuit being in the news
 
Homerboy said:
Yes, they are fucking retarded. It's impressively retarded in fact.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter in terms of whether she was wronged - she absolutely was. But a huge part of a civil lawsuit is damages and it's very hard to imagine that she actually suffered $55M in damages over this incident. She wasn't fired, her reputation wasn't smeared, she didn't quit her job and go through years of psychiatric hospitalization over it, etc.
 
SearchMaster said:
It doesn't matter in terms of whether she was wronged - she absolutely was. But a huge part of a civil lawsuit is damages and it's very hard to imagine that she actually suffered $55M in damages over this incident. She wasn't fired, her reputation wasn't smeared, she didn't quit her job and go through years of psychiatric hospitalization over it, etc.
Click to expand...

so what's the right number in your mind then?
(please show your work as to how you got to the answer)
 
so lets see why america is so fucked up nowdays
man shoots illegal porn
post it online
arrested
woman sue
and the court gives
28m for a guy that has no money
27m for the hotel!?!??!??!

why not ask 280m or 1m or 100k
if you do not have the money it does not make any sense to just put a number to impress
2. why the hotel??? what the hotel done wrong !?!?!?!?

your legal system has fucked up everything
and destroyed your country
 
SearchMaster said:
It doesn't matter in terms of whether she was wronged - she absolutely was. But a huge part of a civil lawsuit is damages and it's very hard to imagine that she actually suffered $55M in damages over this incident. She wasn't fired, her reputation wasn't smeared, she didn't quit her job and go through years of psychiatric hospitalization over it, etc.
Click to expand...

well it is a ridiculous number, sure, hence my comment about cop killings. but who knows. would she have done a nude photo shoot for a million? prob not. 10 million? again, probably not. also, were there any punitive damages included? it would make more sense if it was a deterrent/punishment for the hotel.
 
Anubis said:
I prob heard about it years ago and forgot 100% about it, TBh I may have 100% missed it and only heard about it nowish because of the lawsuit being in the news
Click to expand...

I havet seen the movie.
just the stills.

she looks very good candid.
she probably looks freaking amazing airbrushed (when she was younger like in 2008 when the video was taken)
 
ALIVE said:
what the hotel done wrong !?!?!?!?
Click to expand...

I don't believe in re-inventing the wheel so I'll just c/p Zinfamous' excellent post:

Creepy dude at front desk: "Hey, can you tell me what room Erin Andrews, the famous hottie sports celeb, is staying in and can you give me the room directly next to hers?"

Front desk: "Yes, absolutely!"
Click to expand...
 
Homerboy said:
She and her attorneys apparently did -- to the tune of $55M.
You're the one saying that answer is wrong, so you must have some different formula in mind that differs from theirs?
Click to expand...

Yes, they did - to this particular jury. It will be appealed and almost certainly reduced to a more believable number. Most people questioned the McDonald's "hot coffee" lawsuit...which was later reduced significantly.

If she was a nobody and this video was put on ******* without her permission and exposed to millions of rabid viewers, would she have been awarded $55M in damages? Almost certainly not. So what's the difference between her (as a celebrity) and everyone else? Really it's just the fact that her reputation had much more value to be damaged. But I'm having trouble seeing that her reputation was damaged much, if at all. So that leaves punitive and actual damages, which both defendants should be liable for. And I think whatever punitive damages would have been awarded for the average Jane ($500K? $1M?) would be in line for this case. Actual damages would be attorney fees or any other cash she had to outlay as a result of the incident. I have no idea what that figure is but again, I doubt it exceeds 7 figures.
 
SearchMaster said:
It doesn't matter in terms of whether she was wronged - she absolutely was. But a huge part of a civil lawsuit is damages and it's very hard to imagine that she actually suffered $55M in damages over this incident. She wasn't fired, her reputation wasn't smeared, she didn't quit her job and go through years of psychiatric hospitalization over it, etc.
Click to expand...

She has been screwed from a pyscho stance if you read about it. She is highly paranoid now about everything when she travels. It is a mind fuck to have your privacy violated like she did. This is a punitive award and I am fine with it. The Hotel if it wasnt in on the gig should had seen red flags when a man calls to get a room right next to an attractive celebrity.
 
Ns1 said:
I don't believe in re-inventing the wheel so I'll just c/p Zinfamous' excellent post:
Click to expand...

and the hotel is in wrong why!?!??!?!?!?!
why not sue the America president then
it is he fault the schools failed to give moral to the person that worked in the hotel and caused the problem

unless that person has do the same thing in the past and somehow kept his job then yes the hotel are in charge

if that person goes to church lets sue also the church
and the list can go on

you can not held a company responsible for the morality of employes

thats why america is so fucked up
lets fuck the hotel for no good reason it happens
lets punish a company that steals the people and do illegal stuff
never happens
 
SearchMaster said:
Yes, they did - to this particular jury. It will be appealed and almost certainly reduced to a more believable number. Most people questioned the McDonald's "hot coffee" lawsuit...which was later reduced significantly.

If she was a nobody and this video was put on ******* without her permission and exposed to millions of rabid viewers, would she have been awarded $55M in damages? Almost certainly not. So what's the difference between her (as a celebrity) and everyone else? Really it's just the fact that her reputation had much more value to be damaged. But I'm having trouble seeing that her reputation was damaged much, if at all. So that leaves punitive and actual damages, which both defendants should be liable for. And I think whatever punitive damages would have been awarded for the average Jane ($500K? $1M?) would be in line for this case. Actual damages would be attorney fees or any other cash she had to outlay as a result of the incident. I have no idea what that figure is but again, I doubt it exceeds 7 figures.
Click to expand...

The McDonalds coffee suit was reduced greatly because McDonalds was able to show the temperature of their coffee is what customers desire. Because of that verdict plans to sue fast food restaurants because it made people fat fell apart. This is a completely different case. I will be surprised if on appeal it gets reduced by much, if at all.
 
ALIVE said:
and the hotel is in wrong why!?!??!?!?!?!
why not sue the America president then
it is he fault the schools failed to give moral to the person that worked in the hotel and caused the problem

unless that person has do the same thing in the past and somehow kept his job then yes the hotel are in charge

if that person goes to church lets sue also the church
and the list can go on

you can not held a company responsible for the morality of employes

thats why america is so fucked up
lets fuck the hotel for no good reason it happens
lets punish a company that steals the people and do illegal stuff
never happens
Click to expand...

Because hotel employees broke their own security protocols to put a pervert next to an attractive well known reporter.
 
Genx87 said:
Because hotel employees broke their own security protocols to put a pervert next to an attractive well known reporter.
Click to expand...

so all the hotel had to do was bribe the hotel employee to say nothing and this problem would have gone away fro Mariott?
 
JEDI said:
so all the hotel had to do was bribe the hotel employee to say nothing and this problem would have gone away fro Mariott?
Click to expand...

1) Create better policies & procedures
2) Hotel is responsible for actions of employee while employee is acting as an agent of the company
 
Did they actually argue that her reputation was damaged to the tune of $55+mil? And the jury bought it? I'm with an earlier poster on this. Had no real idea who she was before this happened. Now everyone knows who she is and most of that is likely due to this happening. I would actually argue she has as much success as she is enjoying now because this happened to her.

Did it suck for her emotionally? Hell yes I'll bet it did. But that doesn't mean she should be awarded anything like what the jury just awarded her. To be honest the judgment itself is probably yet another extension of her now being more popular because of the video and therefore the jurors feel even more likely to give a (now) famous person an extraordinary judgment.

But of course the real winners here are her lawyers. Bravo.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top