Here is the infuriating story of a woman who was visiting a Connecticut hotel: woman was raped in front of her children and was told by the hotel that she was careless. This is an open talk thread where you can discuss this story or talk about anything you like.
I’m mad a hell just reading this story. The woman was raped at gunpoint in front of her own children while staying at the Stamford Mariott Hotel in Connecticut. The rapists name is Gary Fricker who is currently serving a 20 year sentence in prison. The assault occurred in a hotel parking lot, when she was in a minivan with her two young children. Read about it here and here and here.
She subsequently sued the hotel for negligence, claiming that the Connecticut hotel did not use reasonable security precautions and did not patrol and monitor the parking lot adequately. Clearly one can argue if a hotel should really be held liable for crime on their premises. Must all misfortune and bad luck be paid for by someone else?
I think not, but I think less of the Stamford Mariott, Connecticut hotel’s defense. They are responding to her lawsuit by claiming that she was careless and negligent. My goodness. According to the Marriott she “failed to exercise due care for her own safety and the safety of her children and proper use of her senses and facilities.” They also expressed “sympathy” and “regret” for her predicament.
Curious as to reader thoughts. At what point should a defense team simply surrender for fear of the commercial consequences of their defense? And how much liability should a business really have for bad things that happen on their vast premises?
The Connecticut hotel woman versus the Marriott hotel gives us something to think about for a Sunday. Where do you come down?
Photo: Sam’s Hearing Life
August 16th, 2009 at 8:04 am
So for all of you who think the hotel is not to blame, simplify it, your car is parked in the hotel lot, gets broken into and whatever stolen. Nwow should you have to claim it on your insurance or shoudl the hotel claim.
THEIR parking lot is their resonsibility just as their rooms are. You shoudl have the same sense of security and week being in their lot as inside the building itself.
It deosnt mean this would not have happened regardless of any security measures and I agree with those thinking the woman is out to make a buck.
The comments by Marriott will haunt them in the end and probably ensure a win for the woman, I know if I was sitting a jury I would award her the money just for them blaming the victim.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:04 am
I agree with comment 3, the hotel is not at fault for the rape but their choice of defense was not a wise choice. This is a very unfortunate incident cause solely by a sorry S.O.B that is now in prison for 20 years. That is not nearly enough and I hope he gets the same treatment he gave her every night that he gave her. I feel very sorry for the lady but the hotel does not appear to be guilty of anything except an extremely dumb defense that they would not be having to use if they were not being sued.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:05 am
At first glance – after reading the headline – I was appalled. But then after I read the story my mind was changed. I don’t think its right to sue the hotel because someone attacked her in the parking lot. Who would she sue if she was just walking down the street?? I hate it when ANYTHING makes rape look like its the women’s fault – the way she dressed, poor decision making ecetera. However, when she chose to sue the Marriot and placed the blame on them then they have to defend themselves. If they should have been looking out for her then I guess its fair to say she should have been looking out for herself too.
The lesson here is really that all people need to pay close attention to thier surroundings at all times. Places like hotels are particularly inviting to criminals because odds are you are in unfamiliar territory. Also, a women carrying bags, children etc is extra vulnerable because she is distracted. Take care of yourselves ladies!
August 16th, 2009 at 8:06 am
why a woman w/kids would pull into hotel parking lot without checking area is beyond me. wasn’t there valet service or was she trying to save a buck? was she a guest at hotel or just visiting someone there, if that case why did she have her kids w/her ? i have to agree w/hotel her story has too too many holes in it…..bottom line is she is just trying to make a buck out of doing something that she has done before (ie she had 3 kids)
THIS WRITER SHOULD BE SHOT! HE IS ONLY PERPETUATING ACCEPTANCE OF A VIOLENT HORRIBLE CRIME! ANYONE WHO CAN SUGGEST THAT HER HAVING CHILDREN IN ANY WAY ELEVIATES THE HORRIFICNESS OF THE RAPISTS CRIME IS DARK, SHALLOW, CLUELESS, AND DESPICABLE… UNBELIEVABLE!! DISCUSTING PEOPLE
August 16th, 2009 at 8:07 am
I have been in more than one hotel parking lot during my travels and am totally unaware of any behavior that may or may not result in deserving to be raped. If I stood in the parking lot completely naked does that mean I am responsible for being raped? Sort of reminds me of Mike Tyson’s defense for rape, “Of course I raped her, she should have known better than to come to my room!” Every business owes it’s customers a reasonable level of security and every customer should realize that no security measure eliminates 100% of threats. I would have to say the fault falls squarely on the rapist, but Marriott stands to lose purely for presenting such an awful defense. If they seriously believe the woman is at fault for being raped they open themselves up to the same judgment.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:08 am
From someone who was raped at knifepoint many years ago, a woman is not responsible : we comply to save our lives. The hotel is not responsible either. The rapist is. The woman’s suit and response from the hotel are classic legal maneuvers.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:10 am
Is the hotel liable or not?
Well, let’s see. If the hotel calls itself a five stars hotel, it had better consider itself liable, and do a lot of reflection as to why such a thing happens.
If the hotel claims to be only a dingy, seedy, rundown motel, then let’s forgive the management.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Don’t you get it? It has to be the fault of the hotel. This is our world – blame anyone for everything, go for the deep pockets because large coin provides the greatest relief, watch a few more installments of Dr. Phil and feel so much better when the check hits the bank. So sad. Very, very sad. Poor woman. Poor children. Victims. However, one victim has now turned perpetrator. Rape is about power and control – taking by force. The victim and her team of lawyers are not much better than the animal who assaulted her in front of her children. She, they, now seek to take by farce, er, force (talk about Freudian) that to which they have no entitlement. (Odds are the case will never go before a jury anyway – a settlement offer will be forth coming and most likely accepted. Of course it should really be called extortion.) Those of you who choose to side with and support her quest to rape the bank account of the hotel chain really need to reconsider terms like fault, culpability, and accomplice. No, she is not at fault in any manner for the attack. Yet she is at fault for her greed inspired response. The defendant, Marriott, is guilty of retaining idiots but not at fault for the actions of some animal. The attorneys, both plaintiff and defense deserve to be the rapist’s neighbors – better yet, prison bitches. Get real.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:11 am
It’s a sad relection of today’s society that we , as hotel operators, have to display signs at the reception, parking facility and evn on the grounds advising guests that if they have any concerns in any area of the hotel then security will immediately escort them. The sad reflection is not that someone might want to sue the hotel for neglignece but that our guests cannot enjoy our facility without the need to be so vigilant for their safety.
Whilst our guests are on our property they are our responsibility and we take that very seriously.
Do we ever have problems – absolutely but I like to think we handle them immediately and not insult the guersts further by passing the buck and making them feel guilty or responsible.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:15 am
I believe the hotel has a responsibility to it’s patrons to provide a reasonable amount of safty precautions, however I also believe that if those precautions are met the lawsuit is baseless. In this day and time of less police and less protection from criminal acts I think that ever person should realize that we need to protect ourselves from these criminals. I would much rather see this rapist dead than have to support him for however long they decide he needs to spend in prison.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:17 am
If a citizen can sue for rape, molestation, or any crime that occurred in private property, why can victims not sue the city, and its law enforment for not protecting them if something happens on public property?
August 16th, 2009 at 8:18 am
Businesses which invite the public on to their property have a duty to their invitees to take reasonable steps to inspect their property and protect their invitees from dangers such as wet floors and construction defects and to take reasonable security measures to protect their invitees from attacks. Although many people have no idea about this duty, it has existed from prior to the founding of our country. Without this duty, unethical business owners may entice customers on to their premises in spite of known dangers and without even disclosing those dangers.
In this case, since the rapist was seen loitering on the premises for some time before the attack, it was unreasonable for Marriott to fail to inquire whether or not he was a guest or was visiting a guest, and if not, ask him to leave the premises. These basic precautions which are commonly taken by hotels would most likely have prevented this rape.
Attorneys for the Marriott used the typical blame the victim defense. Naturally, it is highly unlikely that a jury would buy that BS, but it gives them an opportunity to have the judge take the issue away from the jury by entering a summary judgment for the Marriott even though that would be contrary to the standard for entry of summary judgment. By the way, when was the Constitution amended to allow judges to decide cases instead of a jury?
While this is an unbelievable defense, it is a typical tactic to paint the victim as the one who is responsible for negligent and even criminal conduct. If you want to know how often horrible crimes like this are committed which the mainstream news media routinely ignores and how the victims usually get no redress, see http://dailycensored.com/2009/06/24/why-does-the-u-s-government-torture-people/
August 16th, 2009 at 8:20 am
Actually the hotel needs to blame the woman. That is how these cases are litigated. A percent of the blame will go to the victim, A percent to the victim, and a percent to the hotel. My opinion is that it is 100 percent the rapists fault…but hey…I’m part of the dieing out “Old School” of American thought.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:21 am
What are you so upset about? While the crime is horrible, it is not the hotel that raped her! SHE brought the suit. The hotel should roll over and play dead?! (Let her “rape” them?) Where’s the justice in that?
Maybe it’s shocking the hotel would call her careless, but aren’t they just pointing out that we all have an obligation for our own safety? Again, SHE brought the lawsuit; they are just defending themselves again her bogus claims.
Let me go on. What if the rape occurred after she left the parking garage. Would she have sued the city of Stamford?
Give us a break lady. I’m sorry you became a victim of a violent crime, but it is the perpretator who needs to be brought to justice, not the rest of society.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:23 am
I wonder how the Hotel’s attorneys would react if it were there wives or daughters that were the victim.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:25 am
Hey Ed…There is a long history of court cases concerning police protection. It is one of things us gun owners take seriously.
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html
To summarize the courts have determined that the police have no obligation to come to your defense. They will show up and do a crime scene investigation though. LOL.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:25 am
Tbone… you are a self righteous ass. The government, both federal and most states, strip us of the ability to protect ourselves by not allowing us to carry firearms. The rapist had a gun. Tell me in all of your (“Everything that does or does not happen to me is a result of my own decisions and actions, and I cannot blame any person aside from myself for my lack of preparation and participation in MY life.”) wisdom, how exactly should she have responded to someone threatening her and her children with a gun? Do you advocate breaking the law and say that she should have carried a gun with her to be prepared for this situation? Not everything that happens to a person is within their control. You could take a bullet to the head before you even know you are being targeted. Or are you better trained than police and 360 degree aware at all times? You seem to be blaming victims for being victims.
The rape would not have taken place if the hotel staff had questioned the rapist they had noticed lingering in the parking garage or called the police to have them question the individual. Hotel staff were negligent and disregarded the safety of it’s customers.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:29 am
The woman deserves the respect of everyone, and the sympathy of all. She most certainly has a case for the restitution of all medical expenses and emotional distress incurred, FROM the felon who perpetrated this crime upon her.
Holding the hotel responsible is but a tactic that plaintiff attorney’s now employ in order to fatten their wallets, and punish others for the misfortune of the innocent. The sad part here is that some businesses lose these cases due to a liberal leaning of a jury, and their need to compensate someone at the expense of those who have, or may have, the deeper pockets.
The eventuality here is that, when enough of these cases are won by the plaintiff, that the consumer pays. The cost of these awards is then factored into higher room rates. Driving business away due to costs.
The other issue here is that, how far does one go to protect the public? Are business owners then charged with the responsibility of providing armed protection for their customers from the business to their vehicle? To public transit? From the hotel to the airoprt? Where do you draw the line?
To be brutally honest, we, as consumers, cannot afford to protect everyone from everything. Juries need to apply common sense to a situation and render a decision based upon that common sense.
And, again, unfortunately, each of us must accept the responsibility for our own personal protection and not place ourselves into a situation where we are exposed to imminent danger.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:30 am
Mark is right, when you invite someone to your property (especially innkeepers, they have an even higher duty of care) you have a legal obligation to make sure your premises are safe. The fact that there was some suspicious activity reported and nothing was done just increases the degree of responsibility Marriott bears. What is even more unbelievable is that Marriott would make such a defense. As an attorney, sometimes we would tell our clients (big name corporate clients for the most part) that while the law might be on your side, you probably don’t want to fight this one because it will just give you more bad press, thus a loss in business, then the suit is worth. Marriott should have done the same here, pay the lady some amount in a settlement, you probably could have payed her a million or so and the case goes away. Now they risk losing much more in business revenue simply because people are disgusted that they would make such a callous argument. Silly.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:31 am
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/16/whats_scary_about_health_care_reform_97901.html
August 16th, 2009 at 8:35 am
well this is just something to think about….you should in a parking garage have some sort of security where no one but guests can enter the structure, certainly if it is private like a hotel or resort. once you exit the facility now you are at your own risk. in a parking garage their are more dark places to hide and corners to hide in. like they said they saw this man loitering in their building the day before. the police should have been called and a field interview should have been recorded, maybe this alone would have detoured this offender from this act. Now this not being done means someone did think this man was doing something wrong and they failed to act to do the right thing. So in the defense of the woman the hotel failed to report this man for loitering so the hotel is negligent for the crime. Everybody in the united states of america has a duty to protect each other if you see something or someone out of the ordinary at least call the police because maybe something could or would have been stopped before it started. it just seems everyone wants to be a spectator today and video everything on their phone. Did you know if you fail to act as a citizen and not help a police officer in a situation where the police officer needs help you could be arrested for failure to act as a citizen?
August 16th, 2009 at 8:37 am
It’s infuriating for something like this to happen, but at the same time it’s hard to say who’s to blame other than the rapist without knowing the details and facts. I do alot of traveling & stay in some cities well known for their street crimes. I’m very aware of almost everything happening around me. This helps prevent becoming a victim but is still no guarantee of being safe. Here are some questions that should be considered:
Was there a security guard? How often were his rounds? Was he making his rounds?
Was there security cameras? Were they working? Were they being watched? (or was the person at the front desk watching TV in the lobby with the security guard instead of watching the monitors?)
Was the parking lot well lit/lighted? Were any of the lights out? 1 or 2 or several? For how long?
One article said she noticed the rapist hanging around the hotel for days before the attack. Did she report it? Did she ever talk to the rapist before the attack? (did she approach him or he approach her, the reason for this question is some rapes are one night stands gone bad & some people don’t care if their children are there or not)
How was she dressed? (I know a lot of people don’t want to here this but it’s a known fact that the way you dress says volumns about you, first impressions)
August 16th, 2009 at 8:38 am
The stories I read didn’t say what the hotel’s secutiry policies were and if they were followed that night. The hotel was involved in designing the parking structure and has a duty to thier customers to provide adequate safety. The question is, was policy followed? I tend to believe some camera’s were in place because it was determined the guy hung around before the act and was caught a few days later. Thank you to the hotel if that is the case for helping him get caught.
However, if policy was not followed and it could have made a difference, then they should be held accountable for thier part. No, they didn’t invite the rapist or give him the gun, but you should not be allowed to give off a false sence of security.
One article I read said the hotel leaked her identity by interviewing her pilates instructor. Sound to me like they are trying to get her to drop or settle out of court. The rapest is already in jail and if I read it right, her identity wasn’t known to those around her until the lawsuit? Sounds like a stretch.
Those who ask what she was doing there with her kids? Who cares. What was she wearing? Who cares. Was she careless? I doubt she saw the gun before stopping. She didn’t ask to get raped, trial proved that.
You can’t hold the hotel responsible for the rape but they do have to provide some safety. Hopefully her lawsuit will improve upon thier safety measures.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:40 am
A rape victim cannot be blamed for the mental disturbances and criminal actions of another person as seen by the attacker. The hotel is completely out of line with such a statement. Of course, it may not be the hotel’s fault, but to childishly place the blame on the victim is out of place and down write inhumane.
August 16th, 2009 at 8:43 am
I don’t think its the Hotel’s problem that a person attacked a woman on there property. I mean the people who made the statement that it was her fault because she was raped should pay for being stupid. Because, I don’t think she had anything to do with being born with a vagina and in my world she could walk outside at midnight totally nude is doesn’t give anybody the right to rape her. What should happen is the person that raped her should get the death penalty because if he gets away with his action he will rape again and the reason I believe in this harsh act is because women sell sex everyday all over America and you don’t have to force any woman into any kind of sexual act. A man can pay and if he gets caught the charge is not rape and he can pay a fine or do jail time which is much lesser than rape….Think about it pervert.