News: PFT: Michael Irvin's lawyer is "mad" that Marriott refuses to produce surveillance video

[Pass2Run]

Like I was saying last week or two, they're going to have to give it up when the judge orders them to... just a matter of time.

Patience.

The bellyaching from the Irvin camp is merely trying to bolster his defamation suit, and add value if they happen to be awarded anything.

 

[Pass2Run]

You know nothing about either one and you're off the rails with hair color and piercings and how many hotel managers do you know?

At least Irvin has history which brings about doubts that he is the innocent party here.

If all you need is pictures of the woman and manager, you must be the guy they were talking about that judges books by looking at the covers.

Might interest you to know that some of the most heinous monsters of our time looked very normal, like Ted Bundy. He was so handsome women couldn't think he was that creature. Dahmer looked pretty normal on the outside too.

And it's piercings, pearcings are fruit.

How dare you question RoboQB? He's got so much analytical talent, all he needs is a picture of someone to decide what happened.

That how bigoted, er, um, I mean, talented he is.

 

[Ring6]

The only thing preventing NFL Network and ESPN, who were fed apparently unconfirmed information that affected their production, from joining in this suit against Marriott, is the fact that Marriott is a sponsor.
They help pay everyone's salary over there.

I am still surprised NFL Network and ESPN don't switch gears and "better late than never" back their employee in this instance, at least until proof of any wrongdoing is provided. Seems that would be the move, there are other sponsors.

 

[Flamma]

Honestly you are being willfully ignorant and Intintionally building BS strawman arguments. What matters is what she told the manager and what the manager told the NFL. Then after that is know that will determine what was said during their interaction. Again I find it hard to believe he said something in 45 seconds that was so offensive that it caused him to be kicked out and banned. What's funny about this, is you have created all these stories about him but haven't offered up one speculation about what is so offensive that it would cause him to get kicked out. But I get it, you dislike him based or stories you have heard.

Also as I said before, working the SB is high profile. It raises his status in the media. He was denied that. He doesn't need monetary compensation to have suffered injury.

Who knows what was said? Some people get insulted by something said, while another person might laugh it off. What was said is subjective. And I don't know what a video would prove if it has no sound. Show that it appeared to be a pleasant encounter?

 

[Mk2_Cowboys]

I'm told "Innocent until proven guilty" is the standard for jurisprudence. Somebody ain't telling the truth about the case and jurisprudence.

That went out a long time ago. Now the media is judge and jury.

 

[Pass2Run]

Why do you keep talking about public perception as if that has any bearing on the case. It does not. For defimation he has to prove that she or the hotel communicated a known lie to a third party (NFLN) that's it. Public perception doesn't matter. The damages are obvious. Anyone in the media knows how prestigious it is to cover the Superbowl. To act like it is not, is being willfully ignorant. He is also suing for tortorious interference. This is why he wants to video and he wants the names of the people involved so he can get exatcly what they said by whom to who, and then show that it is a known lie.

Yep, at some point, his team can place them under oath, so the truth can come out...they'll likely have depositions, the whole 9 yards.

 

[CouchCoach]

The only thing preventing NFL Network and ESPN, who were fed apparently unconfirmed information that affected their production, from joining in this suit against Marriott, is the fact that Marriott is a sponsor.
They help pay everyone's salary over there.

I am still surprised NFL Network and ESPN don't switch gears and "better late than never" back their employee in this instance, at least until proof of any wrongdoing is provided. Seems that would be the move, there are other sponsors.

You are assuming NFLN and ESPN believe Irvin. ESPN removed him off the network and then off ESPN Radio for just this sort of thing he's involved with now.

The NFL has never come out in support of an employee either under investigation or charged with anything.

What did either have to gain by backing Irvin? They are really not party to this and no one is blaming or questioning their position in this.

The irony is that it is the NFLN's actions that Irvin is so upset about but how can anyone listen to that radio interview on 105.3 and fault NFLN or ESPN? The moron said he didn't remember because he'd had some drinks and then used the term "hiding out". What was NFLN to do?

I have no idea what Irvin said that set this in motion but I do know everything he said in public after that was a huge mistake and ammo for the Marriott lawyers. He is really an unintelligent man.

 

[Plankton]

Look, I have no idea what happened in the hotel that resulted in Irvin being removed from the residence. Neither does anyone else. Could it be the interaction in the lobby? Yes. Could it be due to something else entirely? Yes. We don't know, so it's hard to opine.

What I can opine on is whether Irvin has a case for being damaged by the hotel. As I see it, the hotel has not publicized any of this or any of their actions. From their vantage point, they handled this quietly and did nothing to publicly out Irvin as having done anything. If they had notified the NFL Network, it was likely due to any billing related issues from him being removed from his accomodation. They didn't notify the authorities, nor did they go to the media about this.

The only one who has made this public is Michael Irvin. He is the one who brought this forward to call his character into question. He's the one who continues to keep the story alive by filing a lawsuit. Had he not been interviewed on the radio about this, it very likely would have gone without much notice, and any "damage" to his reputation would have been minimal. There has been no indication that he has been fired from any of his media gigs. We don't even know if he was suspended without pay, or suspended really at all. When all of the public facing actions and dialogue has come from Irvin and no one else, it's hard for him to claim that another party worked to damage his reputation. If anything, his need to keep this in the media eye has hurt him more than anything that the Marriott did. JMO.

 

[MarcusRock]

Look, I have no idea what happened in the hotel that resulted in Irvin being removed from the residence. Neither does anyone else. Could it be the interaction in the lobby? Yes. Could it be due to something else entirely? Yes. We don't know, so it's hard to opine.

What I can opine on is whether Irvin has a case for being damaged by the hotel. As I see it, the hotel has not publicized any of this or any of their actions. From their vantage point, they handled this quietly and did nothing to publicly out Irvin as having done anything. If they had notified the NFL Network, it was likely due to any billing related issues from him being removed from his accomodation. They didn't notify the authorities, nor did they go to the media about this.

The only one who has made this public is Michael Irvin. He is the one who brought this forward to call his character into question. He's the one who continues to keep the story alive by filing a lawsuit. Had he not been interviewed on the radio about this, it very likely would have gone without much notice, and any "damage" to his reputation would have been minimal. There has been no indication that he has been fired from any of his media gigs. We don't even know if he was suspended without pay, or suspended really at all. When all of the public facing actions and dialogue has come from Irvin and no one else, it's hard for him to claim that another party worked to damage his reputation. If anything, his need to keep this in the media eye has hurt him more than anything that the Marriott did. JMO.

This is where it's at currently. All the happenings/evidence has come out of the Irvin camp. This is why I don't get why some pro-Irvins (some who deny they are but .... yeah, lol) and anti-accusers get in a tizzy when it's the only thing out there to analyze. I do hope the case fully plays out in court to get all the details but it's unlikely.

 

[TwistedL0g1k]

It's not fair to blame Irvin alone for "making it public" as so many have done. For example, if a starting player was benched right before the Super-Bowl, that's a public incident- whether or not the player chooses to comment on it. It was the actions of the NFL Network (for right or wrong) that cast a spotlight on this- by pulling Irvin off his job. Irvin's statements were a reaction to this. It would have been news even if Irvin had kept his mouth shut.

 

[CouchCoach]

It's not fair to blame Irvin alone for "making it public" as so many have done. For example, if a starting player was benched right before the Super-Bowl, that's a public incident- whether or not the player chooses to comment on it. It was the actions of the NFL Network (for right or wrong) that cast a spotlight on this- by pulling Irvin off his job. Irvin's statements were a reaction to this. It would have been news even if Irvin had kept his mouth shut.

This was not a player and Irvin's comments were before he got benched, he was hiding out awaiting the next steps according to what he told 105.3 Wednesday morning.

There was a good possibility that his comments on Wednesday morning are what started the NFLN action. So yes, he is to blame alone for outing himself to the public. I imagine NFLN was trying to figure out what they were going to do and then the interview takes it out of their hands with the combination of not remembering because he'd had a few drinks and the really stupid "hiding out" comment.

Since the hotel had taken care of their part and were treating it like it was over, just who was he hiding out from? It sounds like NFLN.

 

[TwistedL0g1k]

There was a good possibility that his comments on Wednesday morning are what started the NFLN action.

It's a matter of public record that the hotel notified the NFL after the incident. The fuse had been lit so-to-speak. The NFL network didn't "bench" Irvin because he spoke publically about it. They "benched" him because of the accusation. Plain. And. Simple.

Irvin could have spoken publically about it sooner, later, or not at all- but it was destined to come out. He chose to get in front of it.

I have no idea what exactly happened, or if Irvin is guilty of any wrongdoing- but this thing was going public regardless of any comments by Irvin after the incident! Blame him for his actions in the hotel lobby if you want, but you can't blame him for the publicity that was inevetiable.

 

[Diehardblues]

I don’t watch much NFL Network. I’m curious , is he still benched?

 

[KingCorcoran]

The only thing preventing NFL Network and ESPN, who were fed apparently unconfirmed information that affected their production, from joining in this suit against Marriott, is the fact that Marriott is a sponsor.
They help pay everyone's salary over there.

I am still surprised NFL Network and ESPN don't switch gears and "better late than never" back their employee in this instance, at least until proof of any wrongdoing is provided. Seems that would be the move, there are other sponsors.

He has to know suing his employer is not going to endear him to potential subsequent ones. He knows what happened and he decided to sue his employer. He obviously feels, based on the facts, this is his best move. If this plays out in court everyone will then know the facts.

 

[Calvin2Tony2Emmitt2Julius]

Scorched Earth policy by Mike or shut up. One or the other either he did something out of bounds or he didn't. All of this BS speak about this and that and who said what. I s boolshizzel.

Television Networks millions, Lawyers make millions, people get their 15 minutes of fame. But don't act like there is any virtue in any of this. Sue the THOT that brought it up in the first place, Sue the hotel for everything you can get

Sue NFLN for every thing you can get out of them. No negotiating, no mercy , No rationalizing, the only thing people understand is when you hit em where it hurts, the wallet. Then maybe just maybe we can save our society from the scourge

of Me Too , BLM and all of those other organizations that are tearing down our society around us . Sandman, he sued the pants off of the Washington post and CNN and won. No negotiating, no back tracking If Mike's innocent of wrong

doing, SUE EVERYBODY!!!!

 

[KingCorcoran]

Scorched Earth policy by Mike or shut up. One or the other either he did something out of bounds or he didn't. All of this BS speak about this and that and who said what. I s boolshizzel.

Television Networks millions, Lawyers make millions, people get their 15 minutes of fame. But don't act like there is any virtue in any of this. Sue the THOT that brought it up in the first place, Sue the hotel for everything you can get

Sue NFLN for every thing you can get out of them. No negotiating, no mercy , No rationalizing, the only thing people understand is when you hit em where it hurts, the wallet. Then maybe just maybe we can save our society from the scourge

of Me Too , BLM and all of those other organizations that are tearing down our society around us . Sandman, he sued the pants off of the Washington post and CNN and won. No negotiating, no back tracking If Mike's innocent of wrong

doing, SUE EVERYBODY!!!!

What if the girl who initiated the complaint to her supervisor was following company policy? What if the Marriott cannot allow a potential hostile environment for any employee and acted appropriately under the circumstances by finding Irvin suitable alternative lodging and it is within their rights to do so? What if the room was being charged to a company credit card making the room NFLN’s room and they appropriately notified them of the action they were taking and why? What if the the defendants in this case never acted in an unreasonable manner? Irvin is the moving party in this action. Irvin is the accuser. Can he prove his accusations?

 

[CouchCoach]

It's a matter of public record that the hotel notified the NFL after the incident. The fuse had been lit so-to-speak. The NFL network didn't "bench" Irvin because he spoke publically about it. They "benched" him because of the accusation. Plain. And. Simple.

Irvin could have spoken publically about it sooner, later, or not at all- but it was destined to come out. He chose to get in front of it.

I have no idea what exactly happened, or if Irvin is guilty of any wrongdoing- but this thing was going public regardless of any comments by Irvin after the incident! Blame him for his actions in the hotel lobby if you want, but you can't blame him for the publicity that was inevetiable.

You seem to have information not released to the public. The timeline of events does not jive with your post.

He broke his own story on radio and included he could not remember what he said because he’d had a few drinks and then mentions he’s hiding out. Who do you think he was hiding out from?

You don’t think his action made the decision for NFLN?

The only reason the hotel notified NFLN is because they were paying for the room.

There was a chance to keep the entire situation private but Irvin blew that. I can guarantee you his lawyer wishes he’d never called into that radio show.

 

[Staubacher]

Scorched Earth policy by Mike or shut up. One or the other either he did something out of bounds or he didn't. All of this BS speak about this and that and who said what. I s boolshizzel.

Television Networks millions, Lawyers make millions, people get their 15 minutes of fame. But don't act like there is any virtue in any of this. Sue the THOT that brought it up in the first place, Sue the hotel for everything you can get

Sue NFLN for every thing you can get out of them. No negotiating, no mercy , No rationalizing, the only thing people understand is when you hit em where it hurts, the wallet. Then maybe just maybe we can save our society from the scourge

of Me Too , BLM and all of those other organizations that are tearing down our society around us . Sandman, he sued the pants off of the Washington post and CNN and won. No negotiating, no back tracking If Mike's innocent of wrong

doing, SUE EVERYBODY!!!!

For all those saying this woman isn't getting slandered and attacked here look up what THOT means.

 

[Staubacher]

What if the girl who initiated the complaint to her supervisor was following company policy? What if the Marriott cannot allow a potential hostile environment for any employee and acted appropriately under the circumstances by finding Irvin suitable alternative lodging and it is within their rights to do so? What if the room was being charged to a company credit card making the room NFLN’s room and they appropriately notified them of the action they were taking and why? What if the the defendants in this case never acted in an unreasonable manner? Irvin is the moving party in this action. Irvin is the accuser. Can he prove his accusations?

For some here, winning Super Bowls 30 years ago is proof enough. Everyone else involved in this are simply haters who conspired to frame and cancel poor Mike.

 

[DallasEast]

For some here, winning Super Bowls 30 years ago is proof enough. Everyone else involved in this are simply haters who conspired to frame and cancel poor Mike.

27 years ago. Allow the 30th anniversary special occasion pain have a few more years before it sinks in too.