Connect with us

Latest News

Woman ‘filmed in shower’ sues Hilton for $100m as footage used on porn sites

Published

on

A woman is suing Hilton Worldwide for $100m (£78.6m) after secretly recorded footage of her naked in a hotel shower was placed on porn sites by a blackmailer.

The hotel giant is being sued by the unnamed woman for negligence, citing “severe and permanent psychological injures, severe mental anguish, emotional distress and other damages”, including medical expenses and loss of earnings.

She was staying at a Hampton Inn and Suites hotel, owned by Hilton Worldwide, in Albany, New York state, in July 2015 while taking a bar exam after graduating from law school.

While having a shower she was recorded, fully nude, by a hidden video camera, the 19-page lawsuit claims.

She had no idea it had happened until September 2018, more than three years later, when she received an email saying “this is you right?” with a link to the video on a porn site published with her full name.

The woman is suing the hotel's owner, Hilton Worldwide, for $100m
Image:
The woman is suing the hotel’s owner, Hilton Worldwide, for $100m

The same person, who claimed “I’m a perv”, then sent multiple threatening emails, saying they knew where she went to university and where she worked.

She did not reply, which led to the video appearing on a variety of porn sites.

Friends, former classmates and colleagues then received a new version of the video sent from a fake email address set up in her name.

The blackmailer demanded an immediate payment of $2,000 (£1,570) then $1,000 (£785) a month for a year for them to keep quiet, the lawsuit claims.

They also claimed other people were recorded in the same room at the hotel.

“We take the safety and wellbeing of our guests incredibly seriously, and find the details included in the civil filing distressing,” said a spokesman for Hilton, Hampton Inn’s parent company.

“We commit to supporting the independent ownership and management of the property as they investigate, respond and co-operate with any law enforcement investigations.”

A spokesman for the Hampton Inn Albany Downtown said they were “shocked and stunned to learn of the allegations” on Monday, and added no recording devices “of any kind” had been discovered at the hotel.

“The safety and security of our guests is our highest priority, and we emphatically do not condone any form of this type of invasion of privacy,” the hotel said in a statement.

“Recently, the hotel underwent a complete renovation. During that process, no recording devices of any kind were uncovered,” it added.

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest News

Healthy dog put down because owner wanted to be buried together | US News

Published

on

A healthy dog was put down because her owner requested she be buried with her in her will.

Emma, a Shih Tzu mix, was euthanized two weeks after arriving at a shelter in Chesterfield County, Virginia on 8 March.

Her owner had died and her will stipulated she be buried with her dog.

Staff at the shelter where Emma was staying were in contact with the executors of the will in the hope of convincing them to sign over the animal so they could have her adopted.

Carrie Jones, the manager of the animal services, said: “We did suggest they could sign the dog over on numerous occasions, because it’s a dog we could easily find a home for and re-home.”

According to WWBT in Richmond, Virginia, the dog was taken to a vet, euthanized and the ashes were placed in an urn and returned to the woman’s estate.

The process is legal in Virginia, by a law which came into force in 2014. But cemeteries have to allocate a separate part of the land for pets, and they can’t be in the same niche as humans.

Other states allow pets to be buried with owners.

The shelter offered to have the dog adopted
Image:
The shelter offered to have the dog adopted

Speaking to AP, vet Dr Kenny Lucas said his clinic would not do it, but admitted it was an “emotional decision”.

Larry Spiaggi, president of the Virginia Funeral Directors Association, said it was abhorrent.

He told WWBT: “It’s not legal to put a dog’s cremated remains – or any animal – in a casket and bury them.”

The state is considering legislation to address the problem.

Source link

Continue Reading

Latest News

UN tells Britain to end ‘colonial administration’ of Chagos Islands | World News

Published

on

Britain should end its “colonial administration” of the Chagos Islands and return them to Mauritius within six months, the UN has demanded.

The 193-member world body approved a resolution supporting a finding by the International Court of Justice that the Indian Ocean island chain be given back to Mauritius.

The General Assembly resolution, like the court’s ruling, is not legally binding but it does carry weight as it came from the UN’s highest court, and the vote – 116-6 with 56 abstentions – reflects world opinion.

The court said in its opinion Britain had unlawfully carved up Mauritius, which the Chagos Archipelago was a part of, in 1965 when Mauritius was a British colony.

It said: “The United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible.”

DATE IMPORTED:22 October, 2008A demonstrator demanding her return to the Chagos Islands in the Diego Garcia archipelago shouts during a protest outside the Houses of Parliament in London October 22, 2008. Britain's highest court ruled in favour of the British government on Wednesday, blocking the return of hundreds of Chagos Island people to their homes in the south Indian Ocean after nearly 40 years of exile. The decision by the House of Lords ends a years-long battle to secure the Chagos Islan
Image:
Many Chagossians resettled in the UK and have fought in British courts to return to the islands

Britain evicted about 2,000 people from the Chagos Archipelago in the 1960s and 1970s so the US military could build its air base on Diego Garcia.

Many resettled in the UK and have fought in British courts to return to the islands.

Britain’s UN ambassador, Karen Pierce, told the assembly: “British Indian Ocean Territory has been under continuous British sovereignty since 1814. Mauritius has never held sovereignty over it and we do not recognise their claim.”

She added that the government stands by the 1965 agreement with the Mauritian Council of Ministers to detach the British Indian Ocean Territory in exchange for fishing rights and other benefits and a commitment “to cede the territory when it is no longer needed for defence purposes”.

Mauritius Prime Minister Pravind Kumar Jugnauth told the assembly his country “is extremely disappointed” in the position of the British government.

Mr Jugnauth said the 1965 agreement on the Chagos Archipelago “was carried out under duress” and labelled the forcible eviction of islanders as “a very dark episode of human history akin to a crime against humanity”.

Source link

Continue Reading

Latest News

Warnings over Trump’s plans to pardon war crimes suspects | US News

Published

on

Donald Trump’s plans to pardon several US military members accused or convicted of war crimes have been met with disbelief and anger.

Earlier this week the US president asked for files to be prepared on pardoning the former troops, including one who faces charges of shooting unarmed civilians in Iraq.

The timing indicates he could be intending to pardon the men on Memorial Day in the US (27 May), two sources told the New York Times.

One of those officials said that processing a pardon usually takes months but the Justice Department had asked for these ones to be finished before the holiday weekend.

Among those who have criticised the move was Army General Martin Dempsey, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

He wrote on Twitter: “Absent evidence of innocence or injustice the wholesale pardon of US service members accused of war crimes signals our troops and allies that we don’t take the Law of Armed Conflict seriously.

“Bad message. Bad precedent. Abdication of moral responsibility. Risk to us.”

Retired General Charles Krulak, a former commandant of the Marine Corps, told the LA Times: “If President Trump issues indiscriminate pardons of individuals accused – or convicted by their fellow service members – of war crimes, he relinquishes the United States’ moral high ground and undermines the good order and discipline critical to winning on the battlefield.”

Ted Lieu, a Democratic congressman who served in the US Air Force’s Judge Advocate General’s Corps for four years, said: “No one ever said hey, I support war crimes like murdering an unarmed girl and murdering unarmed captives.

“Until Donald Trump came along. And military leaders are now rebelling at that insanity.”

One of the requests for pardon reportedly relates to Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher of the Navy SEALs, who is due to stand trial in the coming weeks.

Gallagher is accused of killing a wounded Islamic State prisoner under his care in Iraq in 2017 and shooting indiscriminately at civilians. He denies all charges.

US troops have been fighting in Afghanistan since 2001
Image:
Reports say the pardons could be timed for Memorial Day, which is intended for the remembrance of those troops killed in war

Also believed to be included is Mathew Golsteyn, a former Army Green Beret (special forces) who faces a murder charge after being accused of killing an unarmed Afghan who he believed was a Taliban bomb-maker in Afghanistan in 2010.

He also denies doing anything wrong, saying he acted under the laws of armed conflict.

Eric Carpenter, a former Army prosecutor, told US military newspaper Stars and Stripes that pardoning the men would be a “terrible decision”.

He added: “He plays into our enemies’ narrative, which is that we don’t care about Muslim lives.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending