Irvin Press Conference Live - 3/14/2023

[MarcusRock]

Oh look.

You wanting something to be true about Irvin that isnt. Further proving you have it out for the guy. But. You're "objective"

Wanting to be true? I wanted to know what happened. And I was right about what Irvin's team did because they did it last press conference too. That one I predicted before the press conference even started and it proved to be true. This was not about a physical thing. It was always about what was said. Mike said that from the beginning. Why pivot then? It's just funny to me how so many of you don't want to discuss the case and all the questions that come up but are so trained on me. Debate the evidence. Why is that so hard? Oh wait. Talk about biased.

So does this tape more closely match what Marriott said or not?

 

[Bullet22]

Her manager was pissed..maybe he had her make up a story to save her job....this a great big nothing...

 

[Bullet22]

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

 

[Haimerej]

Best part of the video-

Mike's lawyer says, "he keeps more space from him than he does when he's talking to any male at any point in the bar."

As he finishes the sentence Mike is closing the distance and she's stepping back. Lol

Just take note where the conversation started and where they were by the end of it. She stepped back multiple times.

Then later, lawyer says "You see him grab her?" in regards to the allegedly upset manager. No... he doesn't touch her. Unlike Mike.

Runner up-

Mike's body language. Dude is literally leaning back and thrusting his "pelvis" toward her near the end of the conversation. I think around 3:52 you could run a string from his head to his feet and have a makeshift longbow.

 

[Ranching]

They never said "assault". They said "harassment". A lewd comment can absolutely be harassment.

Can't be proven without audio....

 

[The Quest for Six]

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.

She was talking with her hands which a lot of women do, Michael talks a lot with his hands, she then puts her hands behind her back, if a woman was offended by a comment, they wouldn't do that, her head and body sways back because she's laughing at something he said, the same as michael was leaning over when he was laughing at something said, she then kicks her foot out with her hands behind her back, that shows she's comfortable with the conversation, and when she walks away she turns her head as if she saying something while she was walking away and you can see the guy with the white cap on at the bar looking in the same direction as mike...there's nothing there to show any harassment..If Irvin said something offensive, her stance and conduct would be a lot different...

 

[Ranching]

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.

Or shake his hand at the end of the conversation

 

[CowboyRoy]

They never said "assault". They said "harassment". A lewd comment can absolutely be harassment.

Irvin was using sexual assault the whole time in there.

 

[phildadon86]

Wanting to be true? I wanted to know what happened. And I was right about what Irvin's team did because they did it last press conference too. That one I predicted before the press conference even started and it proved to be true. This was not about a physical thing. It was always about what was said. Mike said that from the beginning. Why pivot then? It's just funny to me how so many of you don't want to discuss the case and all the questions that come up but are so trained on me. Debate the evidence. Why is that so hard? Oh wait. Talk about biased.

So does this tape more closely match what Marriott said or not?

LOL. That video literally shows 2 people having a conversation. And possibly someone being offended because you can offend someone very easily in 2023. It literally shows nothing that would warrant being kicked off superbowl coverage and needing to switch rooms. The problem is nowadays people overreact way to freaking easily.

 

[MarcusRock]

Best part of the video-

Mike's lawyer says, "he keeps more space from him than he does when he's talking to any male at any point in the bar."

As he finishes the sentence Mike is closing the distance and she's stepping back. Lol

Just take note where the conversation started and where they were by the end of it. She stepped back multiple times.

Then later, lawyer says "You see him grab her?" in regards to the allegedly upset manager. No... he doesn't touch her. Unlike Mike.

Runner up-

Mike's body language. Dude is literally leaning back and thrusting his "pelvis" toward her near the end of the conversation. I think around 3:52 you could run a string from his head to his feet and have a makeshift longbow.

I mean, when you combine this with Mike's lawyer telling a lie to start the previous press conference that it was the first time Mike has gone public about the story (and not the radio interview that broke the story), it makes you wonder. That's why they promote the "sexual assault" angle that you see people in here repeating because that will get the most "outrage" clicks. But it's about the audio. This video more closely matched what Marriott put out last week and will ultimately be decided by how neat their process was in reporting, etc. I'm wondering if they're going to promote the "angry manager guy made her report this" angle. Doesn't look good to me but the courts get to decide that.

 

[MarcusRock]

LOL. That video literally shows 2 people having a conversation. And possibly someone being offended because you can offend someone very easily in 2023. It literally shows nothing that would warrant being kicked off superbowl coverage and needing to switch rooms. The problem is nowadays people overreact way to freaking easily.

The incident was about the audio and Mike's team pivoted from Mike reporting it was "something I said" to the lawyer promoting "sexual assault."

Let me ask you. Physically, did this video jive more with what Irvin's team has stated or with what Marriott put out in their statement last week?

 

[Diehardblues]

Marriott will pay. This is NOT sexual assault. And lets just say that Irvin was trying to pick her up using some sexual content. So what?

She didnt look offended and she clearly went to talk to him.

If he was using sexual content to pick her up then it could be inappropriate behavior.

 

[Diehardblues]

The incident was about the audio and Mike's team pivoted from Mike reporting it was "something I said" to the lawyer promoting "sexual assault."

Let me ask you. Physically, did this video jive more with what Irvin's team has stated or with what Marriott put out in their statement last week?

Their interaction was longer than I expected .

 

[MarcusRock]

Irvin was using sexual assault the whole time in there.

Did you find that in the document I provided to you Roy?

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

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.

Lol, BS.

If he said what was claimed, that’s grounds for firing.

 

[mldardy]

Right, but people who had an opinion of him guilty are saying they view it otherwise.

Which is why I agree with him saying people are seeing what they want.

I see what you are saying

 

[Diehardblues]

Exactly. I could see if he said these things to a coworker or something of the sort where HR would be involved. But this whole thing seems a lot about nothing.

It depends what was said . If he made a sexual comment then it could be considered inappropriate. The bigger question is was it enough to spur on the decisions made by the Marriott, NFL and ESPN.

 

[rags747]

LOL. That video literally shows 2 people having a conversation. And possibly someone being offended because you can offend someone very easily in 2023. It literally shows nothing that would warrant being kicked off superbowl coverage and needing to switch rooms. The problem is nowadays people overreact way to freaking easily.

Come on man, don’t you know that if you ask some girl out on a date you can be legally locked up and water boarded!

 

[CouchCoach]

Inclusive for either side but that won't stop us.

One thing I did find interesting was the manager that was watching the interaction did not like it but was that jealously or was he already pissed at her and she was off talking to Irvin instead of what she was supposed to be doing?

Did he take her back to the office to further reprimand her and to get him off her case she tells him about the encounter with Irvin. The manager, already in a mood, overreacts and gets security involved and wheels start rolling.

The interaction between the manager and the employee will call for a deposition for him as well as some others that might know about the "relationship" between he and the woman.

Irvin's lawyer doesn't have to prove Irvin did not say what she said he did if he can blame all of this on the overreaction of that manager.

And, of course, we'd like to know what caused the NFL to respond by calling others to help escort Irvin out of the hotel.

Was her no-no-no hand gesture when he mentioned he would come back when she was working? Because that can be interpreted as a threat.

 

[zrinkill]

More like YOU seeing what YOU want.

Really? What is it you think I want to see?