Erin Andrews took the stand for the second straight day on Tuesday in connection with the $75 million lawsuit she filed against a Nashville hotel and the man who filmed and leaked nude videos of her taken through a peephole in her hotel room.
During the cross-examination, the defense for the Nashville Marriott at Vanderbilt University implied through questioning that nude videos of Andrews, which were taken without her consent and eventually posted online, helped her career.
In September 2008, Michael Barrett shot video of Andrews through the peephole of a room in the Nashville Marriott at Vanderbilt University. Barrett also took footage of her without consent at a Radisson hotel in Milwaukee. He was found guilty and sentenced to 30 months in prison.
Andrews isn't suing for financial reasons. In a complaint, she said she had suffered "severe and permanent emotional distress" as a result of the leaked videos, and is suing the hotel for negligence and invasion of privacy. Andrews claims the hotel didn't do enough to prevent Barrett from selecting a room adjacent to her own.
On Tuesday, defense attorney Marc Dedman focused instead on Andrews' highly successful career, noting her large number of endorsements. According to The Guardian, Dedman had asked Andrews, “You have done very well in your career since 2009?” Andrews answered yes.
However ruthless a route this is to take, it is legal for the defense to try and diminish the videos' effects on Andrews' life and career.
The defense claims that the hotel should not be responsible for Barrett's actions.
On Tuesday, Andrews spoke about how those leaked videos "embarrassed" and "mortified" her. A computer expert had estimated earlier in court that the peephole video had been viewed approximately 17 million times since July 2009.
On Monday, Andrews said that after the videos leaked, ESPN, her employer at the time, wanted her to speak about the ordeal in a one-on-one interview on camera before she returned to work, supposedly to prove she wasn't behind the scandal.
"Developments in the case have been interpreted by some to mean that ESPN was unsupportive of Erin in the aftermath of her ordeal," ESPN said in a statement. "Nothing could be further from the truth. We have been and continue to be supportive of Erin."
