Irvin to have 7am Wed press conference - Video in post 113

[MarcusRock]

That’s quite an accusation.

You didn't get it, but not surprised.

 

[CouchCoach]

For the record, I have never said Irvin did anything wrong but break his own story.

Neither the Marriott or NFLN had any reason or anything to gain by going public and for all we know, the NFLN might have been working to salvage the week and get him back on the air.

We have no information about what the NFLN was doing between when they were informed he was moved Monday and the call in Wednesday morning.

They seem to have acted quickly after that call in.

 

[Bobhaze]

I still don't get the raging debate here. From an attorneys stance a lot of this was done by the book on all sides. The thing that screwed things up was Irvin on the radio admitting to drinking and saying he doesn't remember talking to anyone.

From Marriott's standpoint, you hear your employee, you make a move to deescalate the situation and you investigate.
From Irvin's point of view he feels wronged and embarrassed so he hires attorneys to be aggressive and put the onus on the accuser and Marriott.

Again the issue here is if the video shows nothing, you still don't know what was said. You only know that Irvin admitted to being drunk and not knowing what he said. The accuser may be smiling but she also may be deescalating because she doesn't want trouble. Basically everyone is doing their due diligence and at some point all the card will be played.

I literally will just wait and see what happens.

Well said.
The truth is NONE of us know the facts of what happened. It’s why we should always presume innocence until the evidence in court and/or a jury says otherwise. The court of public opinion is always in session and almost always lacking all the facts.

Even Jerry’s recent legal problem brought forward by a woman accusing him of groping and kissing her. None of us have all the facts. Jerry deserves to be considered innocent until his day in court shows otherwise.

I will say however people saying this woman suing JJ is “just a money grab” have apparently not noticed that the judge in this case reviewed the evidence and said it was enough to have it go forward to trial. He could have dismissed it. It may be a money grab, but a judge has said there is at least enough there for a trial.

 

[Rayman70]

The Marriott lawyers are not doing anything different than all lawyers involved in civil suits, cooperating only when they have to and playing the game.

The judge made a ruling to release the video and they fought it. Why? What is there to hide? That seems seedy

 

[Rayman70]

One side is being transparent,the other being coy.

 

[Miller]

did he admit 2 being drunk? Guess I missed that. All I know is witnesses say he said nuthing wrong and was cordial. Due diligence? Right. Marriot is running for cover at every turn . Imagine being fired basically at our jobs for hurting someone's feelings. Think how many other paying gigs he lost after that..ie events and appearances. Thats a fact.

He got on the radio and said he had been out drinking and didn't remember talking to anyone, then he said he didn't remember the conversation with the woman. Yes, due diligence. Your statement "imagine losing your job for hurting ones feelings" is what is wrong with this debate. It doesn't matter what you think. If he said "you have a great @ and legs" and she felt he was going too far and didn't want him in the hotel, that is plenty in any work situation. I'm not sure how that is debatable. But you are jumping to conclusions. As my post said, both side and their attorneys are doing their job. We just need to wait and see. We don't know enough. I'm not on anyones side.

 

[MarcusRock]

Ive answered your question. As usual if you dont like the answer you say it hasnt been answered.

Typical for a corporate person such as yourself. Are you based out of the NY NFL office?

No, I asked you to provide proof of my posts and you respond with "my memory though." That is not an answer. Nor to how I'm "not affording" Irvin a chance to clear his name by simply parsing available evidence. As if it's up to me whether he clears his name or not, lol. I'm no judge, just a good analyzer. If it doesn't gel with what folks hope to see then they get in a tizzy. No different than in the regular season.

 

[blueblood70]

is this "as the zone turns", soap opera for sports ?? did we need 3 threads on MIs possible legal issues on a very thin accusation? i don't see the draw. He not played since the 90s , this has nothing to do with the current payers/team, and at worse its he said she said and nothing to really discuss. he hurt her feelings with words' lock him up forever.

 

[phildadon86]

No, I asked you to provide proof of my posts and you respond with "my memory though." That is not an answer. Nor to how I'm "not affording" Irvin a chance to clear his name by simply parsing available evidence. As if it's up to me whether he clears his name or not, lol. I'm no judge, just a good analyzer. If it doesn't gel with what folks hope to see then they get in a tizzy. No different than in the regular season.

Your posting history on Irvin says different.

You arent a good analyzer. You tried to explain how Godwin's OPI and the Ramsey OPI on Gallup were different. You side with the victim right away. That isnt being objective. At all. Its quite the opposite.

 

[Miller]

Well said.
The truth is NONE of us know the facts of what happened. It’s why we should always presume innocence until the evidence in court and/or a jury says otherwise. The court of public opinion is always in session and almost always lacking all the facts.

Even Jerry’s recent legal problem brought forward by a woman accusing him of groping and kissing her. None of us have all the facts. Jerry deserves to be considered innocent until his day in court shows otherwise.

I will say however people saying this woman suing JJ is “just a money grab” have apparently not noticed that the judge in this case reviewed the evidence and said it was enough to have it go forward to trial. He could have dismissed it. It may be a money grab, but a judge has said there is at least enough there for a trial.

Right!! This really isn't a debatable issue because we all know nothing and there is a process to adhere to. There really isn't any reason to dig your heels in and say Irvin was wronged and it's a money grab or he is a troubled guy and harassed her because there isn't enough to know any of this.

 

[CowboyFrog]

Right!! This really isn't a debatable issue because we all know nothing and there is a process to adhere to. There really isn't any reason to dig your heels in and say Irvin was wronged and it's a money grab or he is a troubled guy and harassed her because there isn't enough to know any of this.

Exactly, this situation stands alone until one side can interject facts that sway the argument.

 

[Merlin]

Marriott has not turned over the video and other records they were supposed to according to the judge's order. Only let Irvin's attorney view it and prevented him from recording it in any fashion. This is not normal.

 

[Zordon]

The Playmaker is about to get another ring.

 

[MarcusRock]

Your posting history on Irvin says different.

You arent a good analyzer. You side with the victim right away. That isnt being objective. At all. Its quite the opposite.

Again with my "posting history." Produce what you're referring to or again it's your "photographic" memory and nothing of substance.

And I've said nothing about the victim because nothing is known of her. What I've analyzed is the evidence out there and some of that involves accounts of her. Because it's only Irvin's evidence at this point, people think I'm "attacking" him if I don't just cosign without critically thinking about it.

 

[Vtwin]

Hey, are you in that 4th window, refusing to reveal yourself?

I have been upfront about that clown well before this reared its head. I can’t stand him and he is the reason I do not watch any NFLN production or programming that has his mush mouth in it.

Fair enough. I don't begrudge you your feelings about Irvin.

You've been straight forward about your motivations, and the joy you take in this drama.

You also are very guilty of classifying anyone who isn't leaning against Irvin, as an Irvin lover who would back him no matter what. That is pure horse crap. You should know better.

I think we can both agree that an impartial and balanced viewpoint isn't likely to be offered by someone with such deep seeded emotions.

Maybe I shouldn't have thrown you in with the others since you have been so upfront about your true feelings. The other two really come across as if they think they are impartial and just examining the evidence.

 

[nightrain]

Marriott has not turned over the video and other records they were supposed to according to the judge's order. Only let Irvin's attorney view it and prevented him from recording it in any fashion. This is not normal.

The footage in question may include Minors or other potentially problematic privacy breaches in the imagry for Marriott to just release it.

 

[Rayman70]

this is a lynching . Mike nailed it.

 

[MarcusRock]

So the conference is over and there was nothing mentioned about what was said, only the same "nothing looked off" from the witnesses we've heard already where they didn't hear or share any details of what was said between Irvin and the accuser. The only thing new here is the lawyer saying the accuser came from behind the front desk. If they were also supposed to get records from Marriott, wouldn't that have the report on what was alleged to have been said exactly? No mention about that either today. So of the options I presented at the top of this thread, it leans towards a softer version of 2.

 

[Rayman70]

The footage in question may include Minors or other potentially problematic privacy breaches in the imagry for Marriott to just release it.

thats not what the judge said. Its not up to the hotel.

 

[Rayman70]

The Playmaker is about to get another ring.

they must settle with him after this presser.