Irvin Press Conference Live - 3/14/2023

[calico]

Gotta love 2023. Why even interact with anyone in public anymore.

 

[Diehardblues]

Saw them and read them but my eyes don’t lie.

And your eyes told you exactly what was said ?

 

[Creeper]

Im still wondering why No one has brought up Irvins bosses and their part in this

Yes, at the end of the day all that matters for Irvin's case is why ESPN took the step of taking Irvin off the air. What role did the NFL play and why? But the NFL can make a plea to ESPN to remove Irvin based only on potentially damaging behavior. The NFL doesn't need to prove anything. Look at the Zeke case. The NFL's own investigator concluded Zeke did not deserve suspension and Goodell acted against her recommendations. But, if the NFL and/or ESPN punished Irvin based on false allegations then Irvin has a case against all of them.

 

[Diehardblues]

You need verbal recordings. If not, anything can be assumed or made up from either party.

Right. Eyewitness testimony from Plaintiff isn’t credible in court. Lol

 

[CouchCoach]

Saw them and read them but my eyes don’t lie.

Then The Eagles weren’t singing about you?

 

[MarcusRock]

You're leaving out a significant detail.

As the woman began to enter the bar area she disappeared behind the pillar. For some reason she stopped. The guy who entered the same area about a step behind her immediately reappeared as he passed through the opening, yet she did not, indicating she stopped walking. It was during this sequence that Irvin's path changed to approach her. Then she moved back into view and their conversation continued.

How do explain this? Did she stop and turn to get Irvin's attention? Did Irvin say something to get her attention causing her to stop?

She could very well have "approached" (that is a figurative term in this case not to be taken literally) Irvin by turning back towards him and getting his attention which caused him to change course and approach her.

It's is interesting that someone so involved in analyzing the evidence hasn't analyzed this important detail.

Explained it this morning. What's more plausible? Her angle is clearly taking her into the bar without even looking Irvin's way. The manager on the other side is clearly trying to get her attention. More attention towards the bar. Irvin is headed to the elevators and leaving his group he took pics with. He sees her, changes his angle and makes a bee-line for her, also speeding his gait to get there. She would have to stop and turn towards him to call out when her path and head weren't even looking in his direction and the manager on the other side is directly in her view trying to get her attention. This isn't a beyond a reasonable doubt criminal case. This is a civil case. What's more likely if a person is on a jury seeing this? More likely. Eh?

 

[Vtwin]

Let’s assume for the sake of argument she did approach him, does that justify his language and alleged cat calls to her?

OK, I'll address this sidetrack away from the point I was making.

To be clear, I am not nor have I ever justified or condemned anything related to this episode.

Having said that, and absent of any authority position the accused holds over the accuser such as in this case, I am firmly in the camp of "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me".

IF the alleged comments were made as reported, my stance would be that Irvin may have certainly been inappropriate BUT... so what. She was never in any danger whatsoever. Irvin took his shot in graphic fashion which could be viewed as inappropriate, then they parted ways. Irvin went to his room, slept it off, completely forgetting about the exchange while she called in the Calvary to address this horrible attack on her. This entire dog and pony show is because an allegedly drunk playboy allegedly said something that apparently hurt the feelings of a fragile little flower.

I'm trying to think of any woman I know who would respond this way in the same alleged situation. I can't think of one. Some might just exit the encounter, some might give him a piece of their mind, a couple might slap his face, some might blush and be flustered, a couple might smile and tell him she'll be up later to make sure he has enough towels.

None of them would play the victim card and probably all of them would forever talk with pride about the time Michael Irvin hit on them.

Both much ado about nothing, and unfortunately a sign of the times.

 

[Cowboysheelsreds058]

Then The Eagles weren’t singing about you?

Love the eagles and they probably was singing about me but still have 20/20 vision and unless there is audio and there is none not looking good for her and the hotel.

 

[MarcusRock]

Are you surprised? Look at the poster.

The guy who claims to be objective lol.

U mad? Again?

Debate the case, bro. Sideline mean girl yapping is not a good look. The scarring is real. Lol.

 

[Cowboysheelsreds058]

Let’s see what the he hotel will do now this has been moved to the AZ courts, the ball is now on the hotel’s side of the field, everyone has seen the footage now, let’s see what the hotel calls here on first down.

 

[CyberB0b]

That video did not exonerate Irvin as his supporters would like but that won't stop them.

I remember seeing at least one say if that triple face slap is on that video, he's cooked. I guess we can assume that security guard was not lying about what he saw and heard?

I have gotten a kick out of all of our resident forensic body language readers telling us she was having a grand ole time until the mean ole jealous manager stepped in.

Can you give me the cliffs on this saga? I just saw the video the other day when it popped up on YT and was wondering why Irvin was even being accused of anything. She seemed a bit uncomfortable, and Irvin may be a creep, but this is supposed to be some sort of assault? Give me a break.

 

[MarcusRock]

Click here for an understanding of sexual harassment

Click here for an understanding of sexual assault

Marriott claims Michael Irvin sexually harassed its employee.

Irvin has a legal right to defend himself. However, it is either an accidental or purposeful self-motivation for Irvin, his legal counsel, or anyone else on Earth to falsely claim Marriott said a sexual assault occurred.

Irvin and his team know what they're doing. They're trying to tap into the anti-accuser angst that says no one can do anything anymore and that liars fabricate things against you when you're just minding your business talking about your junk. Popular theme among sports folks and the case interest is primarily among sports media so pander to the popular thought among that audience in the hopes their emotion makes them forget that this was about what was said, not a physical thing.

 

[Creeper]

Irvin was not following the guy with the hat. Watch his trek as he comes in. He's completely headed to the elevator away from them until he notices the woman and changes trajectory solely because of her and even speeds in her direction. That IS significant because according to Irvin's lawyer the woman purposely approaches Mike for the purpose of interacting with their group when actually she looped around without even looking in that direction. It's also significant because Mike's witnesses say she went up to him to start a conversation. That's debunked here by their paths. She was always going the way she was and can't see behind the pillars in between her and Mike to even know he's coming in at the time she's walking that way. His witnesses everyone was touting take a major hit here as none of them are able to even see their first interaction from behind the 2nd pillar plus they weren't even paying attention to the interaction as it went on.

There was no assault alleged by the defense. Ever. Those were Irvin's lawyer's and Irvin's words. Sexual harassment is what's in the hotel's claim.

The only things left to debate in this case are Marriott's reporting and the NFL's involvement but the video that was supposed to exonerate Irvin here literally follows Marriott's account of the situation down to Irvin slapping himself 3 times and showing the woman doing things that Irvin's team says she didn't do (probably not starting the conversation and backing up several times as Mike moved forward to her). Not a good look for them which is why "the angry manager" is the new distraction narrative. When your story morphs and uses overdramatization tactics there's typically a reason for that.

Here is the statement from a witness to the interaction:

“We walked back to go into the bar, [Irvin] went straight to go to his hotel room, and I guess somebody that worked there, I don’t know if it was a waitress or a bartender I guess came up and said, ‘Hey Michael Irvin.’ And he said, ‘Oh, nice to meet you, I’m Michael’ and shook her hand. The crazy part was it was like a 30-second interaction. It could’ve been a minute. I didn’t really think much of it ‘cause it was just a fan kind of thing.”

What the video does not show is the woman at the point where Irvin turns towards the entrance to the bar. This witness claim she called out to Irvin, which is why he turned towards her. This witness refutes the idea that Irvin turned to her on his own. So let's put that to rest now unless you can provide a witness statement that counters this witness.

But again, it is unimportant to the main case Irvin has against the hotel and the woman. The question is still, did Irvin do anything so egregious that it warranted the hotel calling his employer to get him fired? Was the hotel honest in its statements to Irvin's employers? Why did ESPN remove Irvin from the air? If ESPN acted on false statements by the hotel, then Irvin has a legitimate claim to damages.

 

[Diehardblues]

OK, I'll address this sidetrack away from the point I was making.

To be clear, I am not nor have I ever justified or condemned anything related to this episode.

Having said that, and absent of any authority position the accused holds over the accuser such as in this case, I am firmly in the camp of "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me".

IF the alleged comments were made as reported, my stance would be that Irvin may have certainly been inappropriate BUT... so what. She was never in any danger whatsoever. Irvin took his shot in graphic fashion which could be viewed as inappropriate, then they parted ways. Irvin went to his room, slept it off, completely forgetting about the exchange while she called in the Calvary to address this horrible attack on her. This entire dog and pony show is because an allegedly drunk playboy allegedly said something that apparently hurt the feelings of a fragile little flower.

I'm trying to think of any woman I know who would respond this way in the same alleged situation. I can't think of one. Some might just exit the encounter, some might give him a piece of their mind, a couple might slap his face, some might blush and be flustered, a couple might smile and tell him she'll be up later to make sure he has enough towels.

None of them would play the victim card and probably all of them would forever talk with pride about the time Michael Irvin hit on them.

Both much ado about nothing, and unfortunately a sign of the times.

Very sad your take. And the evermore reason there needs to be accountability.

 

[Reid1boys]

And your eyes told you exactly what was said ?

dont need to know exactly what was said. He bdy language tells me enough of the general TONE of the conversation. I keep asking this question and nobody is answering.

Marriott says other employees sensed how uncomfortable she was due to this interaction and they came to her rescue to end the conversation. Where is that in the video? Who are these employees? Where are these employees?
The security guy??? lol, you must be kidding.

Some of you in here says Mike sees the employees come over and he ends the discussion... that is absolute garage also. It is amazing how some of you see the boogie man in every slight step, every hand movement, or every elbow touch that takes place.

 

[Diehardblues]

dont need to know exactly what was said. He bdy language tells me enough of the general TONE of the conversation. I keep asking this question and nobody is answering.

Marriott says other employees sensed how uncomfortable she was due to this interaction and they came to her rescue to end the conversation. Where is that in the video? Who are these employees? Where are these employees?
The security guy??? lol, you must be kidding.

Some of you in here says Mike sees the employees come over and he ends the discussion... that is absolute garage also. It is amazing how some of you see the boogie man in every slight step, every hand movement, or every elbow touch that takes place.

We know what some of the words said . And it’s very inappropriate.

 

[CouchCoach]

Can you give me the cliffs on this saga? I just saw the video the other day when it popped up on YT and was wondering why Irvin was even being accused of anything. She seemed a bit uncomfortable, and Irvin may be a creep, but this is supposed to be some sort of assault? Give me a break.

Agree, I’ve witnessed guys coming on a hell of a lot stronger than that so I think there was overreaction unless the NFLN’s actions were based on him breaking his own story and forcing their hand in this.

I can only imagine how pissed they were when they heard he’d gone public with this. For all we know, the NFLN could have been trying to keep a lid on it and keep him on the air.

However, we do not know the NFLN’s timeline and just what they were doing or had the NFL taken over and they were on the sideline.

There was an unusual dynamic in this that it was SB week and every owner and their entourage was headed to AZ or already there. That had to get the NFL people a little twitchy and on edge.

 

[Blackrain]

This is absolutely ridiculous she is completely at fault her manager clearly was trying to get her attention and wanted her to do something That's why he was clapping his hands she wanted to talk to Michael and spent almost 2 minutes doing so shaking hands in the beginning and the end of the conversation Michael kept his distance didn't try and hug or kiss her or anything inappropriate.

No one spends 2 minutes talking with someone who is passing inappropriate comments to them no one shakes hands at the end of the conversation with someone who has insulted them with inappropriate sexual comments.

Manager clearly wanted her to get back to work and she ignored him and continued to talk to Michael actually putting her job in Jeopardy to continue the conversation.

I hope Michael nails are *** to the wall this kind of crap should not be tolerated

 

[CouchCoach]

dont need to know exactly what was said. He bdy language tells me enough of the general TONE of the conversation. I keep asking this question and nobody is answering.

Marriott says other employees sensed how uncomfortable she was due to this interaction and they came to her rescue to end the conversation. Where is that in the video? Who are these employees? Where are these employees?
The security guy??? lol, you must be kidding.

Some of you in here says Mike sees the employees come over and he ends the discussion... that is absolute garage also. It is amazing how some of you see the boogie man in every slight step, every hand movement, or every elbow touch that takes place.

The boogie man said he would return when she was working.

 

[Vtwin]

Explained it this morning. What's more plausible? Her angle is clearly taking her into the bar without even looking Irvin's way. The manager on the other side is clearly trying to get her attention. More attention towards the bar. Irvin is headed to the elevators and leaving his group he took pics with. He sees her, changes his angle and makes a bee-line for her, also speeding his gait to get there. She would have to stop and turn towards him to call out when her path and head weren't even looking in his direction and the manager on the other side is directly in her view trying to get her attention. This isn't a beyond a reasonable doubt criminal case. This is a civil case. What's more likely if a person is on a jury seeing this? More likely. Eh?

You conveniently skipped the part about how she for some reason very clearly stopped instead of continuing on her path into the bar area. Why did she do that? Are you saying that she stopped in her tracks because Irvin, from a distance, said something to cause that?

We can't see anything of her actions when she disappears briefly behind the pillar. It is not until after she disappears that Irvin seems to notice her, or at least to change his course towards her. We do know that she aborted her mission to walk into the bar area because she didn't even take the two steps required to reappear on the other side of the pillar.

It is entirely plausible that she did stop, turn and engage. Is it not?

I don't know man. I've been out of the game, so to speak, for over 25 years, but back when I was an all pro player I used to chuckle at the extent some women would go to be noticed while trying real hard to look like they weren't trying. lol Hell, I've listened to them council each other on how to get some dude's attention without looking like they were interested.