Michael Irvin being investigated for sexual assault

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
It's not about being "drunk" - it's about HOW drunk you are to the point you can't consent. The "I was drunk!" does not work here, you must prove you lost your cognitive abilities.

This is the exact reason the "I was drunk" often doesn't work in such cases as this or really any case. Also what makes this difficult is the amount of alcohol that gets people THAT drunk differs between person to person.

She better be capable of showing she was incapable of giving consent or this is a big waste of time.

did you read the account? Sounds like she passed out and believes he had sex with her.
 

punchnjudy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,786
Reaction score
1,872
No. That'd be stupid because if she was drunk, she cannot consent. Welcome to the 21st century.

It would be a lot smarter than hoping there's no physical evidence (if he slept with her) and then having to change his story.
 

CanadianCowboysFan

Lightning Rod
Messages
25,364
Reaction score
8,142
I hope the Network stands behind him, doesn't fire him, and speaks on his character as to the reason why they will wait until proven guilty.

what colour is the sky in your world?

while I agree with you, in today's world, if you are accused of sexual assault, you must be guilty because well women never lie about such things and if the NFL doesn't suspend him, then they must support rape culture because well if you didn't support rape culture, you would believe her

hell, there are some feminist SJW types who believe that even if the police don't do anything to Michael, he still is guilty
 

mattjames2010

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,835
Reaction score
20,691
did you read the account? Sounds like she passed out and believes he had sex with her.

That's not enough to prove anything. That's a simple accusation. Innocent until proven guilty.

So unless multiple women come forward that have no connection to her and have similar stories, this isn't going anywhere.
 

punchnjudy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,786
Reaction score
1,872
true but there is no way there wouldn't be some of his DNA on/in her

Yeah, that was my point. His account, at least according to TMZ, has a lot of details that would be very risky to state if he's lying. Not just the lack of sexual conduct but also saying he was only in the room for 15 minutes and giving a much different account of the text message he received. If he really left around 7-7:30 like she said [she said she saw him leaving when she woke up], and not between 4:30-5, just think how easy it would be for a security camera to catch him in the act of leaving or for someone to notice a celebrity heading out to his car. Giving a false detail like that would be incredibly stupid, especially if he stated that to police.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
That's not enough to prove anything. That's a simple accusation. Innocent until proven guilty.

So unless multiple women come forward that have no connection to her and have similar stories, this isn't going anywhere.

Yes. Always assume a woman is lying.

Boy oh boy, some character defects on display here
 

GimmeTheBall!

Junior College Transfer
Messages
37,677
Reaction score
18,033
Women deserve the same presumption of innocence. Irvin has a history of bad behavior.
 

mattjames2010

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,835
Reaction score
20,691
Yes. Always assume a woman is lying.

Boy oh boy, some character defects on display here

Who is assuming? Stop babbling and actually think rather than going to default emotions.

I am going by the court of law here: Innocent until proven guilty.

You stated her accusation - simple accusations can get the ball rolling, BUT you must provide more or the investigators must come up with something else. I have yet to call her a liar, I am neutral.

If anything, you are going to the default position that he is guilty.

Now, read my post twice and then reply.
 

Beast_from_East

Well-Known Member
Messages
30,140
Reaction score
27,231
That's actually the dumbest claim he could make if he raped her. Of course there would be physical evidence if he slept with her. It would be much smarter to say they had consensual sex from the beginning. Not say that they didn't, and then say oh it was consensual if the lab finds evidence.

Agreed............if he says they never had sex and the forensic lab finds his semen on the swab.........cant then say, oh yea, I forgot, we did have sex but it was consensual.
 

Beast_from_East

Well-Known Member
Messages
30,140
Reaction score
27,231
This is pretty easy

- Did she get a rape kit done? Yes or no? If no, we move on to the next question

- Any witnesses? Yes or no? If not, we move on to the next question

- Any other women recently coming froward with similar stories?

If no to both, I don't care. I'm not a fan of the court of public opinion, I'm not part of a lynch mob. Let the investigators do their job, if they come up with nothing, move on. If they do, goodbye Irvin and you were always a low IQ hypocrite who were propped up as some kinda God due to 90s nostalgia. Wouldn't say I'm entirely surprised he went down a bad path again.

I think we can stop at your first question...............yes, she did get a rape kit done. The article said she woke up and called 911 and was taken to the hospital and given a rape swab. The swab will pickup any traces of semen still left in her, if there is any. If semen is indeed found on the swab, it will be sent to the forensics lab for DNA analysis.

If the DNA analysis matches Irvin's..................he is toast...............better start looking to plea bargain if that happens.
 
Top