Irvin Press Conference Live - 3/14/2023

[IceStar-D7]

What video are you watcing? She clearly walks in a way to ensure she crosses paths with Mike... as his lawyer even pointed out, she leans her head in a way so she can see if mike is on the right side or left side of that pillar. Seeing he was in the right side, she walks around the right side of the pillar instead of the more direct route to the left and back to work. Mike approached her?....smh

We all been there as men. You know how to walk to get to that spot.... This woman did the same. If it were different, I'd say different. But the video clearly showed her timing it right when Irvin came forward. And again? Does she always stop and talk to men coming through the lobby? Was that the reason her boss was mad??? Seems so. And he treated her like a house maid. While Michael seemed to have treated her like a fan. If I were a celebrity? I don't give any fan time.. Then we wonder why??

 

[Smashin222]

I didn't have an opinion one way or another before watching the video. Now I'm CONVINCED that woman was looking for a PAYDAY BABY!
However, because this has been blown way out of proportion, she'll probably stay quiet now. I hope Mike gets her car, and any savings she has that's not in a qualified plan.

What payday? She didn't file a lawsuit. She reported his behavior in private to her employer who then, at the NFL's request, reported it to the NFL who took the action that Irvin is pissed about.

Stop saying **** like this.

 

[mldardy]

I'm glad you're not involved with the law either. There have been 0 criminal allegations in this case whatsoever.

What are you talking about man. You have been responding to me and have made 0 sense.

 

[Vtwin]

If Dak was a better qb, this wouldn't have happened..

Irvin would have scored.

 

[Calvin2Tony2Emmitt2Julius]

n California, as in most states, sexual harassment is a violation of law. California law prohibits sexual harassment of all types in employment and requires employers to train supervisors on how to prevent and deal with sexual harassment.

Hitting on someone would not fall under the category of sexual harassment. Now if I went up to a woman and got pretty sexually suggestive with me, and she said something like, I dont appreciate that and I would like for you to leave me alone, and I persisted, I could likely be charged with something else.... Im not even sure what. In most public settings it would take the business to ask an offensive person to leave, and if they didnt comply they likely could be charged with trespass. which is a misdemeanor.
I looked up stalking and no way would that apply here. I doubt any legal claim could possibly be brought up even if Mike asked her for some sexual encounter.... again, inappropriate, but not illegal. Also, the reaction from the other party to said comments would clearly come into play as well.

Welcome to Clown World

Thanks Man

 

[ClintDagger]

Here’s what I took from it:
*The woman takes the long way into the bar. If I was to guess I would say it was to most likely avoid the manager on the other side who seems to be waiting to reprimand her for something. I think the clap and his other mannerisms show that.
*I don’t think she was in any way aware of Mike until he apparently called out to her, causing her to stop and turn.
*Once the conversation starts she seems to position herself in a way to put that pillar between her and the manager. I assume she knows he is glaring at her.
*Mike is flirting with her.
*She’s clearly uncomfortable in the situation. Could be because of Mike, the manager, or both.
*The manager and security guy have to be close enough for a minute or so to hear the tenor of the conversation. They don’t intervene and instead walk to the back and have a discussion. I think the conversation had their attention for sure but the reason why is unknown to me. If they were concerned I would think they would break it up or at a minimum continue to hover. If the conversation turned as bad as alleged it must have happened after they walked away.

 

[Bullet22]

Irvin would have scored.

He's going for 2..

 

[FoxF]

and the video clearly shows a woman that is not upset at anyting he said..... that is pretty evident to most.... accept those that wanted Mike to get nailed. But have at it.

Nope, not against Mike at all. Just speaking from a legal perspective. Or how I understand the law to work.

 

[MarcusRock]

sure thing... now get a jury to believe that.. the video is clear to me that that was a cordial, friendly conversation.

Now I want to hear from the guy that took the selfie with Irvin AFTER the lady walked away.

I also want to hear from Mr Manager on why he clapped at her then went and waited clearly very impatiently for her by the bar and as soon as she walked up to the bar he "Grabbed," her and took her off into some other location. Didnt she have work to do? This is why you have trials, so ALL of the evidence can be looked at in context. This is why you have juries here from BOTH sides to present their version of the facts and the let juries decide which one sounds more reasonable.

Friendly, cordial AND also two distinct "no-no" motions from her which are defensive at least. I've been explaining and re-explaining the friendly, cordial part almost since the beginning of this case.

What I also want to see is if a jury believes Irvin's side of the story is credible given he's publicly said he didn't remember having the conversation or what was said before magically remembering it today while kinda corroborating what Marriott says he said about her not knowing him or about football and that Irvin said she should check him out. Also, that Irvin's lawyer has now told two outright lies in back-to-back press conferences and that this video pretty much went down exactly how Marriott says it did compared to Irvin's side saying the woman had never backed up or that the witnesses said the woman approached Mike when it was clearly the opposite here. You present this to any person who doesn't know Mike or anything about this case from the top and see who they'd be more apt to believe.

 

[Bullet22]

Nope, not against Mike at all. Just speaking from a legal perspective. Or how I understand the law to work.

The guy in the bar area was...maybe he thinks that she is his girl....

 

[Bullet22]

So 'hitting' on women is a crime? LOL you are ridiculous. I'm glad you aren't a judge or lawyer or anything to do with the law. you would be horrible at it. Just continue to be a hater that's what you are good at.

We'd all be in prison...

 

[khiladi]

What video are you watcing? She clearly walks in a way to ensure she crosses paths with Mike... as his lawyer even pointed out, she leans her head in a way so she can see if mike is on the right side or left side of that pillar. Seeing he was in the right side, she walks around the right side of the pillar instead of the more direct route to the left and back to work. Mike approached her?....smh

That is not even close to what happened..

 

[mldardy]

That is not even close to what happened..

That is what happened. What's not even close is your ability to see those facts.

 

[FoxF]

The guy in the bar area was...maybe he thinks that she is his girl....

Agree, reacted earlier on in this thread to that guy and how strange he appeared to be acting. Wouldn't rule out a setup as Mike's lawer hinted at before the video is presented, guys was the weirdest participant in that video and went right for the girl after... But could be an micro-managing manager just nervous about his area. Having said that, the whole video stinks.

 

[Ghost12]

Yet what is CLEAR AS DAY is:

1. Her “manager” claps to her before Irvin is even in the picture

2. She’s not even looking at Irvin and is entering the bar

3. Irvin actually sees her and speeds up while she is looking the other way heading into the bar and HE INITIATED conversation with her, so the lady turns around and starts talking to him, as any hotel employee would do when a customer calls them, as it’s the service industry.

4. The manager sees Irvin start a conversation with her after he claps, so he maintains a distance and waits for their conversation to end.

What video are you watching?

1. At the moment of the clap at 22:20, Irvin (and the woman) are very much in the manager's line of sight.
2. If she is entering the bar, she sure took a strange course to do so. This isn't a movie set. There is literally no wall on the camera's side of the bar. If she was entering the bar, why would she go all the way around to the front entrance.
3. Irvin never speeds up... he has a drunken gait from the moment he enters the hotel through the whole thing

 

[zack]

The funny thing about all of this…if Irvin is just a guy, is this really getting any attention? Literally there is nothing much going on in the video at all. Is Marriott kicking out a regular customer, nope.

 

[Smashin222]

The funny thing about all of this…if Irvin is just a guy, is this really getting any attention? Literally there is nothing much going on in the video at all. Is Marriott kicking out a regular customer, nope.

If anyone of us made the comment he's alleged to have said to a hotel employee, you bet your *** you'd be finding a new place to stay.

 

[khiladi]

So now we are at the point where the woman knew that Michael Irvin was going to stumble through that door drunk at that precise moment and she was watching the whole time, taking a position where she had a whole bar in her line of sight?

 

[khiladi]

What video are you watching?

1. At the moment of the clap at 22:20, Irvin (and the woman) are very much in the manager's line of sight.
2. If she is entering the bar, she sure took a strange course to do so. This isn't a movie set. There is literally no wall on the camera's side of the bar. If she was entering the bar, why would she go all the way around to the front entrance.
3. Irvin never speeds up... he has a drunken gait from the moment he enters the hotel through the whole thing

Michael Irvin hasn’t even walked in the door when the lady makes her presence in the video. How is he in her line of sight and and how does she know Michael Irvin is going to be coming in stumbling drunk at that very moment that she could time her entrance with his to “hatch her conspiracy” with the manager, who has no view himself to Irvin outside the hotel? And why on earth, if she was hatching a conspiracy take a position with a whole bar and restaurant in front of her and not the other side?

The question is what video are you watching.

 

[DandyDon52]

Sexual Harassment is what they said. Here's a link to a filing of their accusations. Find Sexual Assault in here and get back to me. Page 3 is where their account of the incident starts. Read it and compare it to the video and tell me that it doesn't more clearly match what they say.

https://www.fox4news.com/news/michael-irvin-super-bowl-misconduct-allegation

Marcus I was leaning towards irvin was guilty, but this video doesnt show anything that suggests misconduct of any kind.
The only way to prove sexual harrasment is if they have audio of what was said.
It also looks like she stopped and waited for him, and initiated the conversation.

I dont think she liked him touching her, that explains the step back and hands behind her back, but I am the same way.
So that means little.
She seemed to me to enjoy the encounter.
The manager guy is the one who seems upset with her .

If the nfl pulled him due to this video only, then that is a little bizarre.
based on this alone, he should get his job back.
there is no way to prove either way without audio.