I'm sorry, they're STILL scumbags and I'll never stay in another Marriott again.

And it only took severe public outrage and presumably big loss in reputation? Gee, why would anyone not want to blame rape victims?

Note to Marriott...you've done enough damage and ruined this woman's life...there is no possible way for you to make this better.

Wow, even AFTER all of the outrage, they give a very half-assed one sentence apology. Nothing else.

I have never seen such abundant evidence that a company simply does not care about the consumer, AT ALL.

@Eldritch: Same goes here, and I'm emailing my friends & family to make sure they know about this case too.

@Dave: You'd be suprised just what minds can be changed with severe public outrage and loss in reputation *cough* Apple & AT&T *cough*

@VvsK: They're "taking this very seriously" alright!

There are some things that can't be undone Marriott. This definitely should have been one of those lawsuits resolved behind closed doors with an undisclosed sum going to the victim. I know I'll never stay with them again and as I do the majority of booking for friends and family, neither will they.

So. Not. Good. Enough.

It should go without saying that rape is -never- your fault.

I don't think there is anything Marriott can do to fix this now that they've completely violated her privacy, and tried to blame her for getting raped.

Well that's just crackerjacks, ain't it!?

I guess now that poor woman's colleagues, employees & acquaintances will just magically forget what she didn't care to share with them in the first place.

Too little, too late, Marriott. I'm not staying with that chain.

@Oranges w/ Cheese: When have Apple or AT&T ever done anything close to blaming a rape victim for their rape and then subpoenaing everyone they knew?

This makes the RIAA look like Santa Claus.

Marriot claims it was their insurance company's attorneys who blamed the victim, and they had NO IDEA until the public uproar. I find that hard to believe.

I would expect that Marriott's corporate in-house attorneys would be working with (or at least communicating with) the insurance attorneys. Thoughts?

@VvsK: Obviously, they can't do a "full" apology even if they wanted to because it could mean they're admitting fault. At least the apology is marginally better than the typical "sorry if you interpreted what I said that way" apologies of politicians.

That's one thing (of many) that bothers me about negligence claims- you can't apologize, even if you feel bad about what happened (e.g. a car accident).

I made a couple pleasant phone calls last week, anybody have any truely direct corporate contacts?

@Eldritch: Concur. And their whole host of other hotels.

I stand in awe of corporate idiocy.

I have no comment as I am just in awe.

@Julia789: I agree absolutely.

Where'd you read their claim?

@Julia789: I thought the same thing, that most like it was their carrier's attorneys, not their in-house attorneys, who were investigating and tendering a defense to the victim's lawsuit.

Does anyone know who the attorneys were, specifically? They're the problem here, not corporate Marriott (unless they don't ditch that carrier for hiring scum, or insist that those attorneys be barred from handling any of their current or future claims).

@ARP:
If they had ANY sense at this point, they would understand that they best truely apologize & settle up. Yes, they can FULLY apologize and must. They have lost any defense in the court of public opinion. That is all that matters here, and to them, as it in this case equals money in lost revenue. It will not fix the damage, but they best worry about creating more damage.

@Julia789: Does your insurance company always listen to what you tell them to do when they're addressing a claim on your behalf?

@Smashville: I'm sorry, but I thought the person who did this to her was in jail?

@wvFrugan: +10000

@Dave: Marriott claims that they requested the negligence claim to be withdrawn weeks ago.

@Oranges w/ Cheese: Now that Google Voice applications have been banned from the App Store, you know how the rape victim felt?

@Michael Belisle: This case is a good example for why organizations like Marriott might want to find an insurance company that does.

@Julia789: Wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, but where did you see that? I didn't see that argument in their press releases.

Astounding. "Blame the victim" becomes "blame the insurance company for blaming the victim."

Marriott: It's called taking responsibility for your actions.

A company with true integrity would have never let that lawsuit go out the door, even under pressure from an insurance company.

A company with moderate integrity would have at least taken responsibility for that lawsuit after the fact, rather than pointing fingers.

A company with no integrity at all would continuously pass the buck for a crime that took place on its watch -- first to the victim, then to its insurance company.

Why in the world would I ever choose to stay with a hotel that has no integrity?

If you have this little regard for a guest who was raped on your property, I shudder to think about what you think of customers who aren't victims of a violent crime.

@vdragonmpc:

Just remember at marriott it's your fault if you get raped!

I just thought that I would point out that the articles make it appear as if it was the hotel (the Stamford Marriott Hotel & Spa) that was sued and mounted this loser of a defense. This is different than Marriott Inc., itself being involved. (Notice it was the hotel that was sued, not Corporate, implying that the two have little to do with each other.)

So, it would be more correct to say that THIS Marriott withdrew the defense. Marriott, the company (and by implication the other Marriott hotels) had nothing to do with the suit to begin with.

This conduct would be no reason to boycott all Marriotts worldwide just because one franchisee hired real loser lawyers. I would not be shocked if Marriott pulled the individual hotel's franchise for this crap.

@Julia789: Not necessarily. In cases like this, even though Mariott is technically the client, law firms are hired by the insurance companies and updates, copies of pleadings and motions, etc. generally go to the insurance company rather than the client. If the client asks to be copied on correspondence or requests documents they certainly receive them, but as a general rule it is the insurance company running the show and it is the insurance company that the defense lawyers in this rape case are reporting to. Although I would guess that Mariott's in-house attorneys are now taking a more active role in monitoring this litigation. Additionally, depending on their contract with the insurance company, the client usually has limited say in terms of legal strategy.

L33tminion: Here [www.greenwichtime.com]

@sirwired: And if that's the case, then Marriott corporate ought to be all over this explaining it as such.

Silence from corporate on a high-profile case like this is equivalent to consent. Either publicly denounce the franchisee for unconscionable actions or suffer the consequences.

@dotyoureyes: Just to clarify, the hotel didn't file this lawsuit, the victim did; the actions were part of the response to the suit.

@sirwired: Marriott, Inc. was also named as a defendant in the suit. I don't know if the brief in question was filed on the behalf of the corporation, though.

If it is just the individual hotel, pulling their franchise is an example of the sort of decisive action Marriott could (but has yet to) take to restore their reputation.

@Eldritch: Yep, agreed. It's a step in the right direction, but it's not nearly good enough. You can't blame a rape victim and her toddlers, publicly humiliate them for vindictive reasons, and then say "Oops, my bad!" when the public becomes outraged. If your business is evil, you will pay the consequence, and saying sorry doesn't cut it. You won't see me staying at a Marriott any time soon.

Not good enough, Mariott, not even close. You're way, WAY off. You are lower than where whale shit goes.

@dotyoureyes: They haven't been silent; they're quoted in the article linked by Michael Belisle.

I am going to post again, if you find yourself in a situation where you feel unsafe walking to your car/room/cab stand at a hotel, go to the front desk and request a security escort.

@KCChiefsFan: Am I missing something obvious.. how is it Marriott's fault?

@LupusGray: I'm sorry, but who was the one that subpoenaed everyone she knows and made them keenly aware of the fact that she had been raped?

@Eldritch: Me either!

@windycity: Well put. In short, it depends. However, Marriott must now know that this insurance company's litigation strategies might need some adjustment.

@sirwired:
Thank you, I've been saying this since the original post.
@L33tminion:

@wvFrugan: Well said. They can't possibly look any worse.

@Julia789: i'm curious as to how the insurance company thinks we (as humans or women, take your pick) should act when held up at gunpoint around our offspring.....which is possibly an entirely different scenario than if one is alone. fight mode isn't exactly a viable option when the younguns are present. not that it's totally viable when they are not there either. are we supposed to let the crazy shoot us/the kids and let him assault the kids? then when the wrongful death suit comes, the lawyers would say we should have complied with the requests.

@wvFrugan: Oh, I agree. But you won't get a full-on apology even if they settle. Settlements usually state that they don't admit liability. So that's why you only get these half-apologies or non-apologies these days.

@msbask: Perhaps, but if something they did were damaging to my company's reputation, I would think twice about doing business with them. I also would have been OUTRAGED by this tactic, and would have apologized no matter what, publicly AND privately.

@L33tminion:
Damn it that didn't work, anyway. Marriott Inc was in all likely hood named because they have deep pockets. I'm sure THEIR lawyers were working diligently to get them dropped from the suit. I've worked for hotels that have been sued, not for anything like this thank God, but the first thing the Plaintiff does is try to show that ANY of the employees at the hotel, usually the GM or Executive Committee, are employees of the Mother Company, that gets them named as additional defendant.

@FatLynn: yeah but it doesn't change the fact marriot should know who's in its parking garage. I couldn't get into the sheraton one without proof of stay.

@FatLynn: Absolutely. Don't be afraid to ask.