Irvin Press Conference Live - 3/14/2023

[CouchCoach]

It’s bizarre those defending Irvin can’t comprehend this basic fact.

Irvin is the accuser here, as he is suing the hotel for 100 million in defamation.

Notice how he’s not suing his employer the NFL Network who made the decision to take him off the air on Sb weekend.

All the hotel did at max possibly is got him out of the hotel to another one, which Irvin’s employee was probably paying for with a high per diem anyways. The hotel apparently didn’t even ask Irvin to find another hotel, his employer told him to get another one.

Yep, according to the hotel, Irvin was there when the NFL investigator arrived, talked to the woman and viewed the video and she called in more NFL people and they escorted Irvin out of that hotel. Where they took him who knows but the word "moved" was used form the beginning and since this was SB week and sold out, they felt obligated to move him to another hotel.

What happened after that until Irvin called into 105.3 is unknown. It is my contention that this act is what triggered the send home. Irvin gave them no choice so we do not know what they were planning to do.

 

[Blackrain]

By the way, is it just me, or are all the national sports shows staying away from this subject? Ive seen nobody discussing that video since it was released? Are the MEN all too afraid to discuss this for fear of saying something that wil also get them fired?

That's quite possible you can't say anything anymore or have an opinion without somebody getting totally butt hurt over it

 

[JJHLH1]

The eyewitness testimony that came out a month ago, well before the video was released is very damaging to Marriott’s case.

Both eyewitnesses say that it was the woman who approached Michael.

That’s very important.

This is verified on the video where she takes the long way around the outside of the bar area in order to intersect Michael as he is entering the lobby.

Both eyewitness also also say the interaction was “jovial” and that there was laughter.

This is confirmed by the body language on the video.

Neither witness has a reason to lie. One is from Australia and had never seen a football game before. The other is a fan from Philadelphia who admits he grew up hating Michael and considered him the enemy.

I think the jury will find their testimony to be believable.

Marriott and the accuser better get their checkbooks ready.

 

[Blackrain]

His defenders also don’t get the fact that the hotel defines their own policy and they reserve the right to make a judgment call to remove the guest. It’s not a legally binding court case.

Then it should have happened right then and there there was a security guard circling if she was disrespected or there was inappropriate behavior the security guard was no more than a few steps away at any time she could have voiced what happened and said she wanted him removed but she shook hands and left as though nothing happened then became offended later.

If whatever he said was that bad why didn't you handle it in the moment.

 

[khiladi]

Yep, according to the hotel, Irvin was there when the NFL investigator arrived, talked to the woman and viewed the video and she called in more NFL people and they escorted Irvin out of that hotel. Where they took him who knows but the word "moved" was used form the beginning and since this was SB week and sold out, they felt obligated to move him to another hotel.

What happened after that until Irvin called into 105.3 is unknown. It is my contention that this act is what triggered the send home. Irvin gave them no choice so we do not know what they were planning to do.

If anything, it looks like the hotel tried to keep this as clean and under raps as much as possible. Their actions demonstrate more so they didn’t want to poke any bear, especially considering the NFL was bringing them a lot of business during SB weekend. So they called the network to handle it.

 

[Blackrain]

The eyewitness testimony that came out a month ago, well before the video was released is very damaging to Marriott’s case.

Both eyewitnesses say that it was the woman who approached Michael.

That’s very important.

This is verified on the video where she takes the long way around the outside of the bar area in order to intersect Michael as he is entering the lobby.

Both eyewitness also also say the interaction was “jovial” and that there was laughter.

This is confirmed by the body language on the video.

Neither witness has a reason to lie. One is from Australia and had never seen a football game before. The other is a fan from Philadelphia who admits he grew up hating Michael and considered him the enemy.

I think the jury will find their testimony to be believable.

Great post if someone from Philadelphia is actually sticking up for Michael what could he have possibly done.

 

[CouchCoach]

First off there was no confrontation both parties look like they ended it with a handshake and they were happy as clams.

You're the one with the complete lack of perspective she was supposed to be at work doing her job her boss was beckoning her to do so she chose to flirt with a celebrity against his wishes.

You don't know what she could have said that could have escalated the situation.

And yes I have women in my life that are much smarter than that if someone was disrespecting them and impeding them from doing their job they would have called security that was only a few steps away which she could have done if Michael was inappropriate or disrespecting her and she did not do it.

I'm sorry if someone said what he was supposed to have said to her it doesn't take days to process that that was inappropriate and she should have called security immediately

She calls security on an intoxicated guest that has not beome a physical threat and what happens? I am sure if this makes it to court we will hear from the Marriott Employee Handbook several times from the defendant on the protocols of handling difficult or drunk guests. The last thing they want to do is increase the tension of the situation.

 

[MarcusRock]

The slaps have nothing to do with the girl she's gone Long gone and if Michael lost his job or is on trial for saying a girl was pretty after she walked by and is 20 yards away then I guess we all should lose our jobs because I can't think of any guy who hasn't said that at some point in time.

It can't have offended her because she's not there

The slaps are what Reid brought up as "good evidence" against Irvin previously if it showed up in the video released. I believe his words were, "he's cooked" if those are present in the video because it's such an odd thing to do to one's self but I am quoting another poster's recollection but I do remember seeing the post. So I am just pointing out that the slaps were in the video to see if he still believes Irvin is "cooked" but the story now appears to be morphing much like Irvin's.

The should he have lost his job is another matter and as I have said before, you can't consider it in a vacuum because several factors are at play including Mike working for an uber-PR-conscious employer in the media and, unfortunately, he has been in trouble with a media employer in the past because of his actions so there'd likely be a shorter leash. So unless you're in that same exact boat as he's in you can talk about shoulds until the cows come home but that's the environment he signed up to live in. Doesn't make it fair but it's how it's done should you choose that line of work.

 

[MarcusRock]

Ever watched ariline gate agents when being berated by some passenger? Think they like to stand there and take it?

Excellent analogy. Some of those airline passengers need a chop to the throat.

 

[MarcusRock]

What on earth are you talking about?

I presented two scenarios and asked this "It is entirely plausible that she did stop, turn and engage. Is it not?" How on earth are you getting that I asked which one was more plausible?

I clearly stated that each scenario was plausible. I never stated one was more plausible over the other. Here you are though, going on about something I never said. It's comical that I brought that up in direct response to your assertion that Irvin clearly approached her and that the witness reports that she approached him were wrong. You simply can't tell this from the video, for the reason I pointed out. Maybe that is why you're trying to beat around the bush. lol

And by the way the question "which one is more plausible" does not carry the assertion that one actually is more plausible than the other. The answer could very well be "neither".

But that is irrelevant since I never asked that to begin with.

You should stop playing and get real. You seem to be in way over your head.

This is fun!

I'm in over my head but you use a long diatribe to detract from the fact that you avoided a question while projecting that I avoided a question I literally built into my ask. Now I know to spell it out and not assume you understand. Glad you finally answered the second time though after that other long-winded distraction attempt. Scooby taught me very well what to look out for. Lol.

 

[Blackrain]

The slaps are what Reid brought up as "good evidence" against Irvin previously if it showed up in the video released. I believe his words were, "he's cooked" if those are present in the video because it's such an odd thing to do to one's self but I am quoting another poster's recollection but I do remember seeing the post. So I am just pointing out that the slaps were in the video to see if he still believes Irvin is "cooked" but the story now appears to be morphing much like Irvin's.

The should he have lost his job is another matter and as I have said before, you can't consider it in a vacuum because several factors are at play including Mike working for an uber-PR-conscious employer in the media and, unfortunately, he has been in trouble with a media employer in the past because of his actions so there'd likely be a shorter leash. So unless you're in that same exact boat as he's in you can talk about shoulds until the cows come home but that's the environment he signed up to live in. Doesn't make it fair but it's how it's done should you choose that line of work.

Yeah he could have been talking about anything with that guy he was walking with it didn't necessarily have to pertain to the girl but yeah he's under a microscope at all times and that's a tough situation for anyone.

I will just go on record as saying I didn't see anything in that video that showed me that he behaved inappropriately, or in a disrespectful sexual manner if anything I believe she perpetuated the conversation rather than abruptly closing it if she had been offended.

Also for an offense grave enough to make him get thrown out of the hotel I would have certainly thought the security guard who was only steps away would have been alerted and he would have been escorted out for whatever he was doing somehow she did not become offended until the next day this is concerning

 

[CowboyFrog]

The eyewitness testimony that came out a month ago, well before the video was released is very damaging to Marriott’s case.

Both eyewitnesses say that it was the woman who approached Michael.

That’s very important.

This is verified on the video where she takes the long way around the outside of the bar area in order to intersect Michael as he is entering the lobby.

Both eyewitness also also say the interaction was “jovial” and that there was laughter.

This is confirmed by the body language on the video.

Neither witness has a reason to lie. One is from Australia and had never seen a football game before. The other is a fan from Philadelphia who admits he grew up hating Michael and considered him the enemy.

I think the jury will find their testimony to be believable.

Marriott and the accuser better get their checkbooks ready.

This will be a problem for Marriott for sure. With no audio to present your only 3rd party witnesses are saying it didnt happen as they claimed.

 

[MarcusRock]

and she should have ...

This is the crux of the outrage on this case right here. Straight line thinking and knowing what another person should have done in a situation you've never been in and probably never will be.

 

[MarcusRock]

The eyewitness testimony that came out a month ago, well before the video was released is very damaging to Marriott’s case.

Both eyewitnesses say that it was the woman who approached Michael.

That’s very important.

This is verified on the video where she takes the long way around the outside of the bar area in order to intersect Michael as he is entering the lobby.

Both eyewitness also also say the interaction was “jovial” and that there was laughter.

This is confirmed by the body language on the video.

Neither witness has a reason to lie. One is from Australia and had never seen a football game before. The other is a fan from Philadelphia who admits he grew up hating Michael and considered him the enemy.

I think the jury will find their testimony to be believable.

Marriott and the accuser better get their checkbooks ready.

See Post #426 of this thread, Page 22. I literally discredited these witnesses myself. You think a lawyer for the hotel is going to do any less in court? Here's a link.

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/irvin-press-conference-live-3-14-2023.509023/page-22#post-12664721

 

[MarcusRock]

Great post if someone from Philadelphia is actually sticking up for Michael what could he have possibly done.

Yoo hoo. Post #426. Tell me what you think.

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/irvin-press-conference-live-3-14-2023.509023/page-22#post-12664721

 

[Bullet22]

Where are the people she works with....None to come forward to verify the assault...

 

[MarcusRock]

Yeah he could have been talking about anything with that guy he was walking with it didn't necessarily have to pertain to the girl but yeah he's under a microscope at all times and that's a tough situation for anyone.

I will just go on record as saying I didn't see anything in that video that showed me that he behaved inappropriately, or in a disrespectful sexual manner if anything I believe she perpetuated the conversation rather than abruptly closing it if she had been offended.

Also for an offense grave enough to make him get thrown out of the hotel I would have certainly thought the security guard who was only steps away would have been alerted and he would have been escorted out for whatever he was doing somehow she did not become offended until the next day this is concerning

The security guard also has to consider what she might or might not want to do about it as far as reporting or not. As I mentioned yesterday, nothing physical was going to happen. Security patrols the bar for that reason. So she could rest assured of that. But if someone is going to make comments, you don't interrupt those in case you need to be a witness for a statement later. So as long as nothing appears to be getting physical, you let them talk because you might need evidence for later. You see though that as Mike kept creeping up on her (look at where they start and where they end up - that's all Mike moving forward and her backing up) one security guard did make himself obvious and then it stopped before anything else could happen. But they had enough alleged evidence in case a report was filed, and she did.

 

[MarcusRock]

Where are the people she works with....None to come forward to verify the assault...

There was no assault alleged. And they have backed harassment claims as part of Marriott's internal investigation. They haven't called press conferences that I'm aware of.

 

[MarcusRock]

This will be a problem for Marriott for sure. With no audio to present your only 3rd party witnesses are saying it didnt happen as they claimed.

So what do you also think of Post# 426?

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/irvin-press-conference-live-3-14-2023.509023/page-22#post-12664721

 

[gtb1943]

So what do you also think of Post# 426?

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/irvin-press-conference-live-3-14-2023.509023/page-22#post-12664721

what about Marriott getting slapped around by the judge? Much more telling.