News: Judge Orders Hotel to Give Michael Irvin Video Footage and Accuser Name in Alleged Misconduct Case

[RoboQB]

Posters are really confusing sexual harassment or inappropriate behavior with the law which calls for innocent until proven guilty, except in the court of public opinion.

It is funny that without any, ANY, evidence (that video taken by the bar patron is inconclusive as to what was said) we have two divided camps as to if he did anything wrong. One side is based on his history, my side, and the other because he played for their team and they like him. They choose to ignore his history.

Also, what is so difficult about not saying anything inappropriate to women and why do some jump to conclusions that it's all made up? I guess you're OK with Cosby, Epsten and Weinstein?

Do you know why it took women so long to come out against Cosby and Weinstein? Fear of not being believed kept some of these women silent for years because the same men that accuse the women of circling the wagons do the same thing for men.

Now, this woman, an employee of the hotel, is motivated to lie by what? I am confused about that. She is an employee of the hotel and might she just think if he will say whatever he said to her, he might do the same with female guests? Could she be acting in her position as an employee more than as an offended woman?

Marriott is very large corporation, do you think they would have a security guard make a decision to move a guest? Especially a guest that might just make the news? They have some video and an employee that we know nothing about but they have trust in her. And she might not have expected this to go this far, she might think she was just doing the responsible thing in reporting this but you can bet someone in management, allowed to make a call like this, made it.

And some base their opinion about this on what? What Irvin cannot remember? If he can't remember then how do you know he didn't say exactly what she reported? Because he played for your favorite team.

And let's remember, the Marriott only did what they did, they did not send him home and take him off the most important game of the year. Ask yourself why did NFLN do that so quickly?

How presumptuous. Only two camps, eh.
If I see a woman shake hands with a man as they part separate ways,
then I wake up the next morning to hear the man has been removed from his job
AND the hotel, I gotta wonder, what happened!?! Did she follow him upstairs? No.
Then what?

And it has nothing to do with the past or a favorite team, or player.
If stuff can fall apart that rapidly with NO evidence, or implication, it's alarming.

 

[tunahelper]

Posters are really confusing sexual harassment or inappropriate behavior with the law which calls for innocent until proven guilty, except in the court of public opinion.

It is funny that without any, ANY, evidence (that video taken by the bar patron is inconclusive as to what was said) we have two divided camps as to if he did anything wrong. One side is based on his history, my side, and the other because he played for their team and they like him. They choose to ignore his history.

Also, what is so difficult about not saying anything inappropriate to women and why do some jump to conclusions that it's all made up? I guess you're OK with Cosby, Epsten and Weinstein?

Do you know why it took women so long to come out against Cosby and Weinstein? Fear of not being believed kept some of these women silent for years because the same men that accuse the women of circling the wagons do the same thing for men.

Now, this woman, an employee of the hotel, is motivated to lie by what? I am confused about that. She is an employee of the hotel and might she just think if he will say whatever he said to her, he might do the same with female guests? Could she be acting in her position as an employee more than as an offended woman?

Marriott is very large corporation, do you think they would have a security guard make a decision to move a guest? Especially a guest that might just make the news? They have some video and an employee that we know nothing about but they have trust in her. And she might not have expected this to go this far, she might think she was just doing the responsible thing in reporting this but you can bet someone in management, allowed to make a call like this, made it.

And some base their opinion about this on what? What Irvin cannot remember? If he can't remember then how do you know he didn't say exactly what she reported? Because he played for your favorite team.

And let's remember, the Marriott only did what they did, they did not send him home and take him off the most important game of the year. Ask yourself why did NFLN do that so quickly?

The NFL acted on Irvin for the same reason the hotel overreacted. If an employee accuses a patron of an indecent act they have to act or they may be sued by the employee later. The NFL has to act, so they do not broadcast a pervert at the SB. If Irvin hashes out the story and he is innocent the NFL reinstates him with pay. The NFL didnt act out of racial bias it was a business decision and overreaction.

 

[CouchCoach]

How presumptuous. Only two camps, eh.
If I see a woman shake hands with a man as they part separate ways,
then I wake up the next morning to hear the man has been removed from his job
AND the hotel, I gotta wonder, what happened!?! Did she follow him upstairs? No.
Then what?

And it has nothing to do with the past or a favorite team, or player.
If stuff can fall apart that rapidly with NO evidence, or implication, it's alarming.

There is NO EVIDENCE that you or I have been made aware of because the only party we've heard from is Irvin and he can't remember.

And it has everything to do with him being an ex Cowboy or we would not be discussing it here.

Is the ultimate humor of this lost on us? The man can't remember what he said and files an 100M lawsuit against her and the hotel group. What's his point? "I can't remember what I said but I didn't say that"?

I do not know what was said and we may never know, this doesn't have to be made public but I do know what was said by Irvin when he got back to Dallas and good luck to his lawyer with that in front of a judge or jury. "I can't remember, I had some drinks, to tell the truth. Oh, hey, I am not drinking now and I remember".

 

[CouchCoach]

The NFL acted on Irvin for the same reason the hotel overreacted. If an employee accuses a patron of an indecent act they have to act or they may be sued by the employee later. The NFL has to act, so they do not broadcast a pervert at the SB. If Irvin hashes out the story and he is innocent the NFL reinstates him with pay. The NFL didnt act out of racial bias it was a business decision and overreaction.

Overreaction? I have not seen indecent act or pervert used in this at all. I am not sure the hotel overreacted at all because I don't know what transpired. One thing I do know is that major corporations and this kind of thing, they are all going to "overreact" to err on the side of caution and cover their butts. I would be shocked if The Marriott Group didn't have specific language in their Employee Manual regarding exactly what took place.

This could be falling dominoes with the hotel and NFLN covering their butts once the accusation was made.

Has he lost any pay because of this? The NFLN has not suspended him to my knowledge, just got him out of a situation that was not going to end well if he stayed on the air in AZ. And the NFLN may have reacted more to his defense for not remembering than anything else.

 

[RoboQB]

There is NO EVIDENCE that you or I have been made aware of because the only party we've heard from is Irvin and he can't remember.

And it has everything to do with him being an ex Cowboy or we would not be discussing it here.

Is the ultimate humor of this lost on us? The man can't remember what he said and files an 100M lawsuit against her and the hotel group. What's his point? "I can't remember what I said but I didn't say that"?

I do not know what was said and we may never know, this doesn't have to be made public but I do know what was said by Irvin when he got back to Dallas and good luck to his lawyer with that in front of a judge or jury. "I can't remember, I had some drinks, to tell the truth. Oh, hey, I am not drinking now and I remember".

Several eye witnesses saw it from across the lobby and mentioned the handshake.
They didn't see anything out of the ordinary. Obviously, nobody heard anything.

You strongly implied that people are claiming he's innocent only because they are fans
of him and the Cowboys. I'm fuly aware of his past. It makes him an easy target.
That's of his own doing, I'm aware.

Maybe focus a bit more on the handshake. People don't usually shake hands
after being insulted or assaulted.

 

[CouchCoach]

Several eye witnesses saw it from across the lobby and mentioned the handshake.
They didn't see anything out of the ordinary. Obviously, nobody heard anything.

You strongly implied that people are claiming he's innocent only because they are fans
of him and the Cowboys. I'm fuly aware of his past. It makes him an easy target.
That's of his own doing, I'm aware.

Maybe focus a bit more on the handshake. People don't usually shake hands
after being insulted or assaulted.

You put a lot of faith in witnesses that had posed in photos with him and heard nothing and no one knows if that was even where this conversation that started all of this took place.

I am assuming this video was seen by NFLN but have not heard that as fact. I do not know how they were informed that he was being moved. And the word used was "moved", not banned or even expelled and we know nothing from the hotel or security on how Irvin responded. We only know what Irvin has told the media.

And there are some claiming he's innocent but not because they're fans but because he's a man. I've seen enough of the knuckle dragging Neanderthal responses against any women with Elliott's ordeal, Booger's strippergate and his daughter. Some have a real problem with women and only see them as conniving and evil.

But Robo, let me say that I love this stuff. God help me, these events like those mentioned and Dalrymple and the Upskirts Princess make me giddy with joy because I am bored with football right now and I am spoiled because Cowboys fans get a lot of this stuff. It's our reward for putting up with the Joneses.

And this is a lot better than a drunk Cowboy killing someone with a vehicle.

 

[RoboQB]

You put a lot of faith in witnesses that had posed in photos with him and heard nothing and no one knows if that was even where this conversation that started all of this took place.

I am assuming this video was seen by NFLN but have not heard that as fact. I do not know how they were informed that he was being moved. And the word used was "moved", not banned or even expelled and we know nothing from the hotel or security on how Irvin responded. We only know what Irvin has told the media.

And there are some claiming he's innocent but not because they're fans but because he's a man. I've seen enough of the knuckle dragging Neanderthal responses against any women with Elliott's ordeal, Booger's strippergate and his daughter. Some have a real problem with women and only see them as conniving and evil.

But Robo, let me say that I love this stuff. God help me, these events like those mentioned and Dalrymple and the Upskirts Princess make me giddy with joy because I am bored with football right now and I am spoiled because Cowboys fans get a lot of this stuff. It's our reward for putting up with the Joneses.

And this is a lot better than a drunk Cowboy killing someone with a vehicle.

I appreciate the response.

I felt like the people who were interviewed looked like upstanding citizens.
Then again, I guess they could've been hammered that night.

I just despise the rush to judgement. No matter what side is believed.

 

[CouchCoach]

I appreciate the response.

I felt like the people who were interviewed looked like upstanding citizens.
Then again, I guess they could've been hammered that night.

I just despise the rush to judgement. No matter what side is believed.

It's not really a rush to judgement because we have so little and we're not judging him anyway. Hell, he might have had one too many and said something he wish he hadn't, like he's the only man that ever happened to. he also might have misinterpreted something she said and responded to that.

I think some are getting carried away when we're talking about only something he supposedly said.

I think we should have a rule in this thread. We should all have a few drinks before we discuss it any further to better channel what Irvin might have been thinking. Then tomorrow, I can use his excuse if any of y'all call me out.

This really ain't nuthin, we need some fire as we Groundhog Day into another offseason.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Since when does the NFL take such drastic actions without cause?

 

[CouchCoach]

Since when does the NFL take such drastic actions without cause?

It's not the NFL, it's the NFLN and they have their own shot callers.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

It's not the NFL, it's the NFLN and they have their own shot callers.

Oh, then just call it N since it's not the NFL, Einstein.

 

[catiii]

How presumptuous. Only two camps, eh.
If I see a woman shake hands with a man as they part separate ways,
then I wake up the next morning to hear the man has been removed from his job
AND the hotel, I gotta wonder, what happened!?! Did she follow him upstairs? No.
Then what?

And it has nothing to do with the past or a favorite team, or player.
If stuff can fall apart that rapidly with NO evidence, or implication, it's alarming.

You might not know it but many men (especially rich ones) have "cancelled" women and that's why, swearing bachelorhood forever and refusing to even talk to them, especially if they're a stranger. It's been going on for some years now ever since the lefties began to change the language and add fake words like "triggered" "woke" "cancelled" etc so lots of men have been retaliating in the only way they know how: swearing off women and steering far far away from them even if it means physical isolation. I'm not making that up. It really is a thing.
88's mistake was not being surrounded by his security with their cameras and audio recorders going at all times.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

KNOCK OFF THE PERSONAL ATTACKS.

 

[FVSTONE]

Someone mess with the wrong dude, when they falsely accused him of a criminal act that he did not commit! Mike needs to go after the NFL Channel for sitting him down after the false accusation, it's sad that they didn't stand him and chose to side with the accuser. Mike lost a ton of money over this and he needs to be compensated for his losses. This is the same BS that Harold Reynolds was accused and then fired by ESPN. But Harold won out and got paid for the lies that were told about him.

 

[GMO415]

Give em both barrels Irv

 

[nobody]

I'm sorry, but if you're going to make claims that can cost someone millions or ruin their careers or personally, you should have evidence to back it up. It should never be "because I said so."

So unless the employee and hotel have ironclad evidence he did something inappropriate, then they overreacted and cost him a lot of money and smeared his name in the dirt, regardless of things that happened in the past. If there is evidence, he should be vilified. If there is not enough evidence, then they should be vilified and pay restitution including a public apology. I'm becoming more of the opinion that if it comes out (and is proven) that someone made an accusation and lied about it (like with Zeke's case) then the person should face jail time.

 

[SuspectCorner]

Irvin: I had a few drinks to tell you the truth.

[Wince] Words you never want to say to a traffic cop - much less, the people investigating your alleged sexual harassment.

I LOVE Michael Irvin. He is maybe the greatest locker room leader in the entire history of the Dallas Cowboys. But this looks bad to me.

 

[CouchCoach]

I'm sorry, but if you're going to make claims that can cost someone millions or ruin their careers or personally, you should have evidence to back it up. It should never be "because I said so."

So unless the employee and hotel have ironclad evidence he did something inappropriate, then they overreacted and cost him a lot of money and smeared his name in the dirt, regardless of things that happened in the past. If there is evidence, he should be vilified. If there is not enough evidence, then they should be vilified and pay restitution including a public apology. I'm becoming more of the opinion that if it comes out (and is proven) that someone made an accusation and lied about it (like with Zeke's case) then the person should face jail time.

Civil is his only recourse but he's going to have to prove what she told them is false and I don't know how he does that after saying he doesn't remember. That's the issue here, it either looks like he's lying about remembering and if he's not, how does he prove he didn't say what she said he said? Textbook he said/she said only he can't back up his side of it after what he told the media, which will be used against him should this take the next steps.

I get his suing her and the hotel but I really think his employer reacting that fast and sending him home and taking him off the biggest week had to be embarrassing and an ego bruiser. To the outside world, it looks like NFLN believed her and the hotel when in fact they might just be protecting themselves.

 

[nobody]

Civil is his only recourse but he's going to have to prove what she told them is false and I don't know how he does that after saying he doesn't remember. That's the issue here, it either looks like he's lying about remembering and if he's not, how does he prove he didn't say what she said he said? Textbook he said/she said only he can't back up his side of it after what he told the media, which will be used against him should this take the next steps.

I get his suing her and the hotel but I really think his employer reacting that fast and sending him home and taking him off the biggest week had to be embarrassing and an ego bruiser. To the outside world, it looks like NFLN believed her and the hotel when in fact they might just be protecting themselves.

I would agree with you, but we're talking literal millions in damages all from a he said / she said...so the burden of proof should be on the accuser, not the accused. I rarely drink and I rarely remember every small interaction I have with everyone. I think him not remembering isn't as big of a deal. How many people does he meet a day? I think with eyewitnesses claiming nothing happened and she didn't act upset that unless the video shows something, she and the hotel should be responsible for damages. I get why the hotel acted like it did to protect its employee, but it could have done other stuff instead.

I am not saying he's innocent. I'm not saying he did nothing. I'm merely saying that if you accuse someone of something that will cause such damage both financially and publicly, you'd better have proof or there should be consequences.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Civil is his only recourse but he's going to have to prove what she told them is false and I don't know how he does that after saying he doesn't remember. That's the issue here, it either looks like he's lying about remembering and if he's not, how does he prove he didn't say what she said he said? Textbook he said/she said only he can't back up his side of it after what he told the media, which will be used against him should this take the next steps.

I get his suing her and the hotel but I really think his employer reacting that fast and sending him home and taking him off the biggest week had to be embarrassing and an ego bruiser. To the outside world, it looks like NFLN believed her and the hotel when in fact they might just be protecting themselves.

Coach - how does she prove he said anything? Unless she had a recorder in her purse, it is she said vs. he said.

Surely his past will factor in with the Network. I'm skeptical the hotel got the video to the NFLN so quickly. I suspect their attorneys would wish to hold on to them until discovery is demanded. I wonder since the NFLN is owned by the NFL, how much influence Goodell has in this?

I think Patrice O'Neal's stand-up Elephant in the Room has a section where he talks about how inappropriate women can be without any problems.

I despise this for Michael.