fgoodwin;3267598 said:
I haven't made my mind up -- I'm just wondering out loud why Irvin attracts all these false claims but other rich ex-players, many of them also in the public eye, don't . . .
Perhaps because he has a wild past, well documented, so any such claim might be more easily believed by the general public??
If you're looking to set somebody up, do you go looking to victimize the choirboy, or the wild child??
There's no denying that Michael Irvin was a jerk in his younger day, but it doesn't necessarily follow that he still is... he might be, he might not...
Which means he might be completely, 100 per cent innocent this time around... and in fact, the facts we know about this incident lead most (it would seem) to the conclusion that this accusation is dubious at best...
It wouldn't surprise me if Michael's "redemption" was a con, but it wouldn't surprise me if he's the victim here, either...