News: PFT: Marriott tries to dismiss Michael Irvin's lawsuit, claims he made "harassing and inappropriate comments"

[Staubacher]

He's not my hero. I wasn't quite old enough or aware of sports enough when his career was finished as a player. I'm just trying to afford him due process. If the evidence shows that he did say or do something wrong, then fine, he should be held accountable. But if not or if it was a misunderstanding, then that's why I'm trying to afford due process and hear both sides of the story before I draw a conclusion about one way or the other. For me, from what I've seen, I think it leans in his side, but I could be wrong. I'm just trying to understand both sides.

Fair enough

 

[Captain-Crash]

is she suing him? has she been on talk shows talking about how he verbally abused her?

 

[Diehardblues]

To be honest, I don't know what he said on 105.3. But, as I was saying to Crash, the evidence that I've seen so far leans in favour of Michael.

You really need it see it. Until you’ve seen all of the evidence available difficult to draw an opinion.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

I wouldn't call it suspicious. If someone is trying to score money off you for something you know they did but are trying to make you look like the bad party here, why would you give information to help them determine their next steps quicker? They need the video to plot next steps in an image rehab case. Delaying keeps the current data out there longer (Mike saying he didn't remember due to drinking). Irvin's lawyer can frame it like the hotel is guilty for not producing it but they are one-dimensional at this point and you want to keep them there for as long you can before you're forced to give it over.

Okay, suppose you're right, wouldn't the business in question, being a hotel, be wanting to get this situation resolved? And if it proves their case, especially since they banned him allegedly from all Marriott hotels, wouldn't releasing the tape allow the case to be ended more quickly?

 

[MarcusRock]

Okay, suppose you're right, wouldn't the business in question, being a hotel, be wanting to get this situation resolved? And if it proves their case, especially since they banned him allegedly from all Marriott hotels, wouldn't releasing the tape allow the case to be ended more quickly?

This is a video when the infraction speaks to what Mike said. A video with no sound isn't going to prove what was said. There was no allegation of touching but a video that shows a cordial interaction would be spun as "See? There was no touching." by Irvin's camp even though that's not what the case is about. Again, why would I want them to get to that point sooner than needed? It makes Irvin's lawyers have to spin other things in the meantime in the press when they really want to use the video to determine next steps because it's an unknown to them at this point.

Again, I'm no law guy but I would assume that each side wants to know all there is to know so they can run through all the options they have at their disposal. If you can keep the other side in the dark on a few things you know already, you take that route and only give it up when you're forced to. A quicker resolution isn't always the most desirable path where strategy is involved. This is why KC didn't score that last TD in the Super Bowl when they could have put more points on the board sooner. Strategy dictated that they should wait. Maybe that's the case here or maybe they're just being jerks because they got sued. Lol.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

You really need it see it. Until you’ve seen all of the evidence available difficult to draw an opinion.

True, and it's why I'm trying to afford due process. In all reality, the truth is somewhere in the middle. My view is that it may have been a misunderstanding where he thought he was saying something civil, and she may have deemed it wrong.

 

[TexasBoys2288]

Generation Snowflake

Bada Bing! Hit the nail on the head with a sledgehammer.

 

[MarcusRock]

@Reality time for a new thread. More movement. Slap that newsreadery tag on this one, ya hear? Lol.

Marriott has to turn over their video and assorted stuff by March 7th.

 

[Merlin]

@Reality time for a new thread. More movement. Slap that newsreadery tag on this one, ya hear? Lol.

Marriott has to turn over their video and assorted stuff by March 7th.

It's funny how the guys that have a bias against Irvin have speculated over and over without knowing any of the relevant facts. Then question where others got their info from.

 

[Calvin2Tony2Emmitt2Julius]

@Reality time for a new thread. More movement. Slap that newsreadery tag on this one, ya hear? Lol.

Marriott has to turn over their video and assorted stuff by March 7th.

Cha Ching!!!!!!

 

[Calvin2Tony2Emmitt2Julius]

I am Loving this !!!!!

I really Am !!!!!!

 

[speedkilz88]

 

[Reid1boys]

Let’s hope we don’t see Irvin on NFL network anymore. He was one of the reasons I stopped watching.

One of our greatest receivers but a blatant Homer analyst.

why should we hope anything? You stopped going to games because of prices or jerry or whatever, you dint watch nfl network because of Irvin, you dont take showers because of your soap makers stance on immigration.... cmon. Enjoy life a little and stop letting everything in the world get to you. Mike is an entertainer and an analyst... period. He is not paid, nor is he expected to be unbiased when it comes to the cowboys, no more than Steven A Smith is expected to be objective when it comes to the Cowboys. These shows are entertainment. If you are going to watch them to get the golden key to NFL knowledge, your expectations are way off.

You dont watch nfl network because of Mike and I do because of MIke... so its a wash. Should we all hope he does come back because I want him back?

 

[Reid1boys]

I'm not dismissing but simply analyzing what's out there. If he didn't put details out there then that needs to be pointed out as well as how he described things, which appears to be from a distance. A polite and cordial appearance without hearing exactly what was said does not confirm an actual polite and cordial conversation as I've pointed out with her not needing to react in the moment. That is what I'm saying.

I dont know how you possibly come to the conclusion, based upon what the witnesses have said, that they didnt hear everything or that they were a distance away from the interaction. Its actually quite the opposite based upon what they have said.

 

[Reid1boys]

yeah, if Jeffery Dahmer was a great tight end who won three super bowls with the cowboys some homers would be saying, "I didn't see him eat anybody, I hope Jeffery sue's them into the poor house. Jeffery was one of my favorite players. I still have his atey ate number jersey." smh

your comments on this are ignorant as hell. There is ZERO proof available to any of us that shows Mike did ANYTHING wrong. Yet you acceot as fact that he did SOMETHING.... you dont know what because the hotel nor the lady has said anything about what he did.... but he must have done it, because you think he is a POS.

 

[Reid1boys]

He's not my hero. I wasn't quite old enough or aware of sports enough when his career was finished as a player. I'm just trying to afford him due process. If the evidence shows that he did say or do something wrong, then fine, he should be held accountable. But if not or if it was a misunderstanding, then that's why I'm trying to afford due process and hear both sides of the story before I draw a conclusion about one way or the other. For me, from what I've seen, I think it leans in his side, but I could be wrong. I'm just trying to understand both sides.

Lets just say he said something like.... Hey, you sure have a nice ***. Should that get him fired from the NFL Network? Im assuming you know what the term, **** (mother Id like to.....)means? Well the woman that starred in that antman and wasp movie walked up to Michael Douglas and said, "You are a grandpa Id like to **..
IM not making this up. There was an actual article celebrating her for this. Now imagine if Douglas had walked up to her and said he wanted to f... her. You think he would have an article done celebrating his sex drive at his age?

 

[Reid1boys]

is she suing him? has she been on talk shows talking about how he verbally abused her?

she has done nothing YET. She also doesnt have her entire career on hold over this like he does either. Even if Mike made a sexual comment to her, shed have no case to sue him over. His situation is very different than anything she could try to sue for.

 

[Reid1boys]

Maybe the harassment was on her part. Like she was wanting an autograph or selfie and he refused . So, she was pissed off and made a complaint totally fabricating the encounter . Irvin was just too intoxicated to recall. Lol

even if he was intoxicated, who cares. He wasnt driving. He wasnt working.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Lets just say he said something like.... Hey, you sure have a nice ***. Should that get him fired from the NFL Network? Im assuming you know what the term, **** (mother Id like to.....)means? Well the woman that starred in that antman and wasp movie walked up to Michael Douglas and said, "You are a grandpa Id like to **..
IM not making this up. There was an actual article celebrating her for this. Now imagine if Douglas had walked up to her and said he wanted to f... her. You think he would have an article done celebrating his sex drive at his age?

I don't think that should. To me, that's a situation where, if she was upset by it, she couldve just said that she didn't like it, and he'd probably have apologised. Nothing further would've happened. It's why I'm inclined that something more severe would have to have been alleged for him to be allegedly banned from all Marriott hotels. That is why I question the case that Marriott thinks they have.

 

[Diehardblues]

why should we hope anything? You stopped going to games because of prices or jerry or whatever, you dint watch nfl network because of Irvin, you dont take showers because of your soap makers stance on immigration.... cmon. Enjoy life a little and stop letting everything in the world get to you. Mike is an entertainer and an analyst... period. He is not paid, nor is he expected to be unbiased when it comes to the cowboys, no more than Steven A Smith is expected to be objective when it comes to the Cowboys. These shows are entertainment. If you are going to watch them to get the golden key to NFL knowledge, your expectations are way off.

You dont watch nfl network because of Mike and I do because of MIke... so its a wash. Should we all hope he does come back because I want him back?

The fact you’d place Irvin in the same light as Stephen A speaks volumes.

Yes, it is an entertainment value to some. But not something I’d look to a sports programming network for. Certainly not something we’d look to other former athletes for.

And why it wasn’t respectable analyst as they attempt to portray. Maybe better suited for late night comedian entertainment.