sacase
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 6,351
- Reaction score
- 2,614
I said it in the other thread. People are going to twist themselves in knots. The video doesn't do much. It hurts and helps both sides.Both sides seeing what they want lol
I said it in the other thread. People are going to twist themselves in knots. The video doesn't do much. It hurts and helps both sides.Both sides seeing what they want lol
So the first 3/4 of the tape show her nodding her head affirmatively a lot so I thought it was innocuous enough. But then things change: she steps back a couple of times, uses her hands in a wave motion that does not look affirming. She deliberately takes a wide berth around Mike as she leaves. Then why is Mike looking in her direction a couple of times after she leaves and then slapping himself ? I love me some 88, and this tape is inconclusive, but it didn’t help him.Her body language says it all, her head goes back a couple of times which shows she was laughing at something he said and the fact she had her hands behind her back and kicked her foot forward shows me nothing was said to her that was insulting and when she was walking away, her head was towards Michael and saying something to Mike
They never said "assault". They said "harassment". A lewd comment can absolutely be harassment.Marriott said he sexually assaulted her. This completely disproves that.
Lewd comments are not a crime nor sexual assault.
Oh look.They were speaking to expecting her to slap him after a comment or something physical. This case was never about something physical but I think Irvin's team knows that plays better to get people "outraged" so they made it about that despite Mike's own words that it was about something he said to the employee.
This is what I said in my edit. Twice he reached out and she backed up. That looked strange. But there is so much context missing.So the first 3/4 of the tape show her nodding her head affirmatively a lot so I thought it was innocuous enough. But then things change: she steps back a couple of times, uses her hands in a wave motion that does not look affirming. She deliberately takes a wide berth around Mike as she leaves. Then why is Mike looking in her direction a couple of times after she leaves and then slapping himself ? I love me some 88, and this tape is inconclusive, but it didn’t help him.
I would back away from anyone who seemed drunk that stepped toward me period. That means nothing to me. It looked cordial and she instigated the conversation it seems.Security was with her by that point. And what about those two "no-like" motions she did with her hands? She did back up several times as he moved forward too. What about that body language? That looks defensive to me.
The real point of this video is that it more matches Marriott's account than that of Irvin's lawyers or his witnesses, right down to the point of the 2nd employee taking a picture with Mike and then showing Mike the elevator at the end to which Irvin's lawyer today actually narrated. Does that huge point not deserve a mention? Or the fact that Irvin's lawyer says the woman's manager "grabbed her" at the end when he just told her to come with him. Let's not be selective here. Lol.
The way Mike described in on the infamous radio comments the next day, I expected to see a 45 second encounter where he stopped briefly and then was on his way. Mike’s credibility took a slight hit for me.This is what I said in my edit. Twice he reached out and she backed up. That looked strange. But there is so much context missing.
I also think it’s weird Mike said he didn’t remember the convo at all but today he was specific. I’m sure that will be brought up.
But overall not a lot has changed to sway me one way or another
Throwing your head back doesn't mean you're laughing. Cmon manHer body language says it all, her head goes back a couple of times which shows she was laughing at something he said and the fact she had her hands behind her back and kicked her foot forward shows me nothing was said to her that was insulting and when she was walking away, her head was towards Michael and saying something to Mike
More like YOU seeing what YOU want.Both sides seeing what they want lol
I don’t think so! With an incident like this you have someone staying in the hotel who will have multiple encounters with the person who feels harassed. They cut this out by moving him. Then the NFL Network catches wind of it snd there is no way they can not react or they will get slammed by women’s groups etc for being insensitive. They all did it by a playbook until more information was gathered.I would imagine in 90% of workplaces, IF this incident happened as claimed, it would be handled by bringing both parties in to HR, issuing a warning about the behavior and documenting things, end of story unless something else occurs.
Instead we have a person kicked out of a hotel and told not to work.
People who had prior opinions have stated different interpretation of the video. So I believe the prior quote was correct.More like YOU seeing what YOU want.
What's correct about it? Because I see Irvin not doing anything close to sexual assault.People who had prior opinions have stated different interpretation of the video. So I believe the prior quote was correct.
The only person I saw mad in the entire thing was her boss - or whoever that guy waiting for her is.She didn't seem mad or anything. If Mike said what she claims why isn't she upset? I sure wouldn't stay there laughing with him.
Right, but people who had an opinion of him guilty are saying they view it otherwise.What's correct about it? Because I see Irvin not doing anything close to sexual assault.
He jealousThe only person I saw mad in the entire thing was her boss - or whoever that guy waiting for her is.