A recent civil trial holds Red Roof Inn liable for permitting sex trafficking on its properties, as alleged by eleven plaintiffs.

The Red Roof Inn case stands as a pivotal moment in the fight against trafficking, spotlighting the pervasive issues of sex trafficking and prostitution at specific properties in Smyrna and Buckhead.

Red Roof Employees Accountable

For over a decade, these activities were alarmingly frequent and visible, as revealed in publicly available case documents (Civil Action File No. 1:20-cv-5263-VMC). During the trial, it became evident that hotel employees actively facilitated traffickers and sought to maximize profits from rooms associated with trafficking.

Emma Hetherington, director of the University of Georgia School of Law Child Endangerment and Sexual Exploitation Clinic, emphasized that signs of trafficking were widely reported and should have been apparent to Red Roof Inn and other corporate entities named in the suit. “If you go to Google reviews or to Trip Advisor reviews you will see lots of reports of people saying, ‘This is definitely happening, there is trafficking here, look at what I’m seeing on these properties,’” Hetherington said in an interview on “All Things Considered.”

Hotel Comfort for Traffickers

In gut-wrenching testimony, plaintiff after plaintiff recounted the sexual and physical abuse they endured at the Red Roof Inn properties. One plaintiff testified that she and other victims were forced to see different men every 30 minutes, five nights a week. Through tears, the plaintiff told jurors, “For six years, [Red Roof Inn] allowed us to be there. For six years, they allowed my traffickers to be comfortable.”

The plaintiffs in this lawsuit allege that the knowledge of sex trafficking at these properties went far beyond the hotel staff, reaching up to the highest levels of corporate management. Evidence presented in court included internal communications and depositions that plaintiffs’ attorneys argue clearly demonstrated the company’s awareness of the illegal activities. In one email, Jay Moyer, the then-regional vice president of operations, made a crude remark about “pimps and hos,” which he later claimed was a quote from customer reviews. However, the plaintiffs’ lawyers argued that, regardless of the context, the email indicates Moyer’s awareness that the hotel regularly rented rooms to suspected sex workers and pimps.

Reports of Trafficking Ignored

Furthermore, evidence presented at trial revealed that reports of sex trafficking were brought to the attention of the company’s counsel, George Limbert, as well as its president, Andrew Alexander. On one occasion, a former board member of multiple anti-trafficking organizations informed Limbert and Alexander that a known trafficker was operating out of one of the Atlanta hotels. However, Red Roof Inn never disclosed any action taken in response, and weeks later, the trafficker was reportedly still on the hotel premises.

Winning Precedent

Lead counsel Pat McDonough underscored the case’s significance, stating,

“Our clients sought not only justice but also systematic change in the hospitality industry. By bravely coming forward, they hope to compel major brands to implement policies and training that prevent similar tragedies.”

The trial highlighted that Red Roof Inn corporate was aware of sex trafficking, including minor sex trafficking, occurring on their premises for years. McDonough lamented, “The heartbreaking details of this case underscore that Red Roof Inn not only knew about these issues but chose to profit from them.”

This case stands out as the first of its kind to go to trial against a national hotel brand, establishing a precedent for accountability in the hospitality sector. It emphasizes the need for vigilance and proactive measures to combat trafficking and safeguard vulnerable individuals, ensuring that those who fail to act will face accountability.

Get Involved!