re: Diddy bought the beating tape from Hotel for $50k. Hotel should be investigated as well

Before that enthralling exchange there’d be a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action.

And the hotel would have a strong argument to get the suit dismissed.

quote:

---

Plaintiff lawyer: Hi. So you say you can’t and don’t review all security footage on your properties, correct?

Hotel: Yes. That’s correct

Plaintiff lawyer: well let me ask you this. Say I’m staying at your hotel and I walk up to the front desk and say that I want to purchase security footage from your camera. Do you and your people simply take my money and give me the tape without reviewing it?

Let’s say you do review it before you sell it to me and there is a crime clearly evident occurring on the footage, what do you do then?

A step further, you believe that you have no duty to report any crime that you happen to see on your surveillance video at any point?

Hotel: if a crime is not reported then, correct we have no duty.

Plaintiff lawyer: ok you are going to go with that defense at trial?

Hote: yes

Plaintiff lawyer: see you in court.

---

Hotel: "For the safety and security of our guests, as well as their privacy, we do not routinely review our old surveillance video. It is stored on a server with an industry standard 90-day retention policy. If no requests are made from law enforcement or internal investigations of our own, the VMS application deletes the data automatically. This is in accordance with industry standards, SOX, NIST, et al, and is audited annually by a 3rd party to assure these practices are followed. Here are the audit reports for the last 7 years. If this video was sold to someone, it would be against our policy. Furthermore, all of our surveillance on our properties is outsourced to a 3rd party security firm. Sue them. Nobody from our in-house hotel staff can manipulate or transfer surveillance videos on our leased VMS."

Plaintiff Lawyer: "Can I get a dollar and some envelopes?"