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

[CouchCoach]

I think it's pretty clear that Irvin was the first one to bring it up. And honestly he didn't sound angry as much as sheepish. And his story changed - he tweaked it from not remembering at all to having a few drinks and saying it was a brief interaction.

There doesn't seem to be an indication that the hotel was trying to "cancel" him as his lawyer so dramatically suggests. They took care of business on their end with their employee and their protocols, which they have every right to do. Then they notified the company that was paying the bill for the room as to what they were doing. As others have mentioned, hotels stock and trade is being discreet. But they also can't look the other way and do nothing because an offensive guest is a famous celebrity, that wouldn't be fair to their employees or to the other guests.

I want to make a larger point about the woman and women in general and this doesn't relate to anything you have said. Women are so often damned if they do and damned if they don't as to how to handle uncomfortable comments and actions. If they keep their head about them and remain professional and report it later they are presumed to be making it up and lying about the situation. But if they react in the moment they can be seen as overreacting and making a scene which could jeopardize their career and their reputation.

Even I as a man have delayed reactions to things sometimes especially when I work with customers or interact with other men. I tend to be agreeable so sometimes I reflect later on something that was said and realize the guy was being a total d bag. It's not a perfect correlation to what women have to go through but I do understand having things sink in later and wanting to do something about it.

There are some men here that really have a problem with women and it has shown up every time we get a story about one. From Elliott's girlfriend to Booger's daughter and now this woman we know absolutely nothing about that has been called a gold digger, hooker, drunk. liar and skank. And all of this while knowing nothing about her and knowing Irvin's history.

We have some really great female members here and I cringe every time they have to read something like that. This is a male dominated web site but that is extreme. Some never left the cave.

 

[MarcusRock]

My line of reasoning is that when the hotel went through what they did and kicked Irvin out, there is no way they didn't realize that this would be BIG news with the person who they were going to kick out.

If there was no way the hotel didn't realize this would be big news, wouldn't they be even more careful about going through with it, making sure everything was in place and airtight, knowing it would be scrutinized?

Believe me, you have all different types of people with various personalities who you work with. End of the day, unless it something really wrong that Irvin did (and at this point from what has been out there from the only thing I've seen or heard for like a 45 second interaction), I really think the management of the hotel could have handled this better.

See my above answer. I'm assuming they acted according to their protocols in place. For this to be the shakedown people are talking about, there'd need to be a multi-level conspiracy against Irvin to make it happen knowing it'd be scrutinized and publicized by a pretty good lawyer given Irvin's stature.

The only ones who could have handled this better was the NFLN by not immediately telling Mike to stay quiet while they handle things (and maybe they did and Mike panicked and publicized it) and of course Mike himself who should have immediately called his lawyer (and maybe he did and the lawyer suggested doing what Mike did which doesn't look good on the surface).

 

[CouchCoach]

If there was no way the hotel didn't realize this would be big news, wouldn't they be even more careful about going through with it, making sure everything was in place and airtight, knowing it would be scrutinized?


See my above answer. I'm assuming they acted according to their protocols in place. For this to be the shakedown people are talking about, there'd need to be a multi-level conspiracy against Irvin to make it happen knowing it'd be scrutinized and publicized by a pretty good lawyer given Irvin's stature.

The only ones who could have handled this better was the NFLN by not immediately telling Mike to stay quiet while they handle things (and maybe they did and Mike panicked and publicized it) and of course Mike himself who should have immediately called his lawyer (and maybe he did and the lawyer suggested doing what Mike did which doesn't look good on the surface).

Marcus, I do not think the NFLN knew about this until they heard the audio from the radio show. Why else would he use the term "hiding out"? Who was he "hiding out" from?

One thing he could be pretty certain about was they would notify the payer of the hotel bill of any unscheduled changes and they would not have to report why to NFLN, unless pressed for it. So, he would be asked about it.

He should have called his producer as soon as this happened and maybe they keep things smooth on the surface.

I do not think he called the lawyer, I think Booger had the lawyer call him. He wasn't charged with anything, why involve a lawyer? And if he did and that lawyer suggested he do what he did, he called the wrong lawyer. Do we think any lawyer is going to tell Irvin to start talking?

 

[MarcusRock]

Good points...............I honestly dont know how Irvin is going to deny saying something offensive to that girl if there is just video, but no audio.

If Irvin told her "I will give you $200 for a lap dance in my room" and she just looks at him and says "get lost creep" and walks away.

What good does survillence footage do, am I missing something here?

It doesn't is what I'm saying. What Irvin's team is banking on is harnessing the vocal opinions like what you see in this and other threads, which are those dead set against any accuser's claim or Irvin fanboys that are so biased that they will eat up the fact that video shows Mike never touched the woman as told by witnesses too even though this story is totally about what was said (and Mike himself said this was about what was said). If you garner enough paranoid noise out there maybe the hotel would rather settle than fight a long battle, being constantly accused of wrongdoing publicly. So if it goes the distance, in the end it goes to scrutinizing the hotel's policy so long as they did everything right and in that case any court would find for the hotel because they had every right to do what they did. So unless you have audio, there's really a whole lot of nothing at this point.

 

[CouchCoach]

It doesn't is what I'm saying. What Irvin's team is banking on is harnessing the vocal opinions like what you see in this and other threads, which are those dead set against any accuser's claim or Irvin fanboys that are so biased that they will eat up the fact that video shows Mike never touched the woman as told by witnesses too even though this story is totally about what was said (and Mike himself said this was about what was said). If you garner enough paranoid noise out there maybe the hotel would rather settle than fight a long battle, being constantly accused of wrongdoing publicly. So if it goes the distance, in the end it goes to scrutinizing the hotel's policy so long as they did everything right and in that case any court would find for the hotel because they had every right to do what they did. So unless you have audio, there's really a whole lot of nothing at this point.

If they capitulate in any way in this, how does that look to their female employees? By their actions, they've shown they believe their employee and done nothing wrong. They didn't even out Irvin to the media, he did that on his own.

What is going to come out and necessitate the actual audio from that conversation is Marriott's protocol and training with guests. Her visual response may be a result of training and not proof he didn't say what she said he did. Every employee knows not to make a public scene or they're the one in trouble.

I had an ex Asst Manager from Marriott working for me in Idaho and she told me some crazy happenings that I was unaware of because that's the way Marriott and every other major hotel chain wants it. Women are harassed and propositioned far more than we know.

Think about what goes on in the Vegas hotels where "what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas", an open invitation to naughtiness. The cocktail waitresses in the skimpy uniforms have to have tough skin because they're going to hear it all.

 

[buddieluver]

Just saw a report that federal judge Amos L. Mazzant III is favorable for Irvin's case.

 

[MarcusRock]

Marcus, I do not think the NFLN knew about this until they heard the audio from the radio show. Why else would he use the term "hiding out"? Who was he "hiding out" from?

One thing he could be pretty certain about was they would notify the payer of the hotel bill of any unscheduled changes and they would not have to report why to NFLN, unless pressed for it. So, he would be asked about it.

He should have called his producer as soon as this happened and maybe they keep things smooth on the surface.

I do not think he called the lawyer, I think Booger had the lawyer call him. He wasn't charged with anything, why involve a lawyer? And if he did and that lawyer suggested he do what he did, he called the wrong lawyer. Do we think any lawyer is going to tell Irvin to start talking?

I have to think that Marriott notified NFLN that they were moving Mike, especially since payment might be split between the 2 hotels or totally come from the latter hotel when all was settled. The obvious question from NFLN at that point would be "why the move?" I've posted the link again below (starts at 3:15) and on the audio Mike says that this incident happened on Sunday night. 105.3 posted this interview and story on that site on Wednesday morning according to the date stamp. So there were 2 full days in between the incident and Wednesday morning when he gave this interview. If the NFLN hadn't talked to Mike by then, they're idiots.

You don't keep a guy in limbo that long with no indication of what you're going to do. It's also possible they just told him to stand by and they'd work on it and he got impatient. Like I said before, it could have been that Marriott and NFLN were in the process of keeping this hushed and Mike ruined it because 2 days is more than enough time for NFLN to review any evidence. So this is why I say NFLN could have done this better. We know Mike shouldn't have piped up but what was NFLN doing in those 2 days? So maybe Irvin's lawyer did authorize this and Mike bungled it because I'd be on the horn to my lawyer with a delay like that.

https://www.audacy.com/1053thefan/s...n-speaks-on-incident-involving-woman-at-hotel

 

[RoboQB]

There are some men here that really have a problem with women and it has shown up every time we get a story about one. From Elliott's girlfriend to Booger's daughter and now this woman we know absolutely nothing about that has been called a gold digger, hooker, drunk. liar and skank. And all of this while knowing nothing about her and knowing Irvin's history.

We have some really great female members here and I cringe every time they have to read something like that. This is a male dominated web site but that is extreme. Some never left the cave.

There's plenty of public info on Elliott's girlfriend. It's clear she earned whatever
she's been called on any board. Not sure what was ever said about Jerry's
daughter aside from Garrett seemingly always close to her.

Not all women are perfect lil' flowers. Especially when you factor in young women around pro athletes. Zeke's gf was pissed that he was breaking up with her. The funny part was the texts
between them. You could tell he was afraid to tell her he wanted to part ways. Then, she crashed
his birthday party and went bat-poop crazy. But, that's another story.

Staying on topic, I still tend to believe this was a case where the hotel management
overreacted. And possibly, Irvin also overreacted.

If everyone took one side here, there wouldn't be much to a conversation.
Just two or three people constantly agreeing with each other.
So, the fanboy, women-hater, caveman callout stuff is a bit annoying.
No sane person is wishing harm on anyone.

 

[CouchCoach]

I have to think that Marriott notified NFLN that they were moving Mike, especially since payment might be split between the 2 hotels or totally come from the latter hotel when all was settled. The obvious question from NFLN at that point would be "why the move?" I've posted the link again below (starts at 3:15) and on the audio Mike says that this incident happened on Sunday night. 105.3 posted this interview and story on that site on Wednesday morning according to the date stamp. So there were 2 full days in between the incident and Wednesday morning when he gave this interview. If the NFLN hadn't talked to Mike by then, they're idiots.

You don't keep a guy in limbo that long with no indication of what you're going to do. It's also possible they just told him to stand by and they'd work on it and he got impatient. Like I said before, it could have been that Marriott and NFLN were in the process of keeping this hushed and Mike ruined it because 2 days is more than enough time for NFLN to review any evidence. So this is why I say NFLN could have done this better. We know Mike shouldn't have piped up but what was NFLN doing in those 2 days? So maybe Irvin's lawyer did authorize this and Mike bungled it because I'd be on the horn to my lawyer with a delay like that.

https://www.audacy.com/1053thefan/s...n-speaks-on-incident-involving-woman-at-hotel

I did not know that was the timeline and just assumed this was the next morning. So, he hadn't been on in two days and no one was asking why?

The process was slowed down by lawyers advising each entity what to do. And there wasn't even a lawsuit at this point.

 

[CouchCoach]

There's plenty of public info on Elliott's girlfriend. It's clear she earned whatever
she's been called on any board. Not sure what was ever said about Jerry's
daughter aside from Garrett seemingly always close to her.

Not all women are perfect lil' flowers. Especially when you factor in young women around pro athletes. Zeke's gf was pissed that he was breaking up with her. The funny part was the texts
between them. You could tell he was afraid to tell her he wanted to part ways. Then, she crashed
his birthday party and went bat-poop crazy. But, that's another story.

Staying on topic, I still tend to believe this was a case where the hotel management
overreacted. And possibly, Irvin also overreacted.

If everyone took one side here, there wouldn't be much to a conversation.
Just two or three people constantly agreeing with each other.
So, the fanboy, women-hater, caveman callout stuff is a bit annoying.
No sane person is wishing harm on anyone.

Then the terms gold digger, hooker, drunk, liar and skank should not have been used by the Irvinites. I find that very annoying when they know nothing about this woman.

But that is how it's done. They elevate their guy by denigrating the other person.

Since I don't know what's in their handbook, I don't know if Marriott's reaction wasn't just by the numbers, including no public comments about this. We don't know their protocol but they acted quickly as opposed to NFLN. And major hotels are discrete.

All they did was move him, they didn't charge him with anything. His reaction started the chain of events we've seen.

 

[RoboQB]

Then the terms gold digger, hooker, drunk, liar and skank should not have been used by the Irvinites. I find that very annoying when they know nothing about this woman.

But that is how it's done. They elevate their guy by denigrating the other person.

Since I don't know what's in their handbook, I don't know if Marriott's reaction wasn't just by the numbers, including no public comments about this. We don't know their protocol but they acted quickly as opposed to NFLN. And major hotels are discrete.

All they did was move him, they didn't charge him with anything. His reaction started the chain of events we've seen.

We are 7 pages deep. I don't recall seeing a run on comments calling the woman
anything aside from gold digger, which would be inaccurate. Attention seeker, maybe.
We knew from the start that she was an employee. So, "hooker" and "drunk" are
probably not correct. "Skank" is possible, but also doubtful.

If you were asked to move, and were innocent, wouldn't you be pissed? Just sayin'.

If I woke to a knock on my door and was told I'm being removed from the hotel,
I'd definitely make a scene.

 

[RoboQB]

Then the terms gold digger, hooker, drunk, liar and skank should not have been used by the Irvinites. I find that very annoying when they know nothing about this woman.

But that is how it's done. They elevate their guy by denigrating the other person.

Since I don't know what's in their handbook, I don't know if Marriott's reaction wasn't just by the numbers, including no public comments about this. We don't know their protocol but they acted quickly as opposed to NFLN. And major hotels are discrete.

All they did was move him, they didn't charge him with anything. His reaction started the chain of events we've seen.

After skimming 7 pages, I did NOT find any references of "hooker or drunk,".
"Gold digger" was used once, by Staubacher, in context of claiming others felt she was
a gold digger. I didn't search for "liar".

 

[Staubacher]

There are other threads on the topic. And you are absolutely wrong that no one here has wished harm on her. They have wished for her life to be ruined, sued into oblivion, etc. I guess she doesn't get the benefit of the doubt because of Zeke's girlfriend? Huh?

 

[CouchCoach]

After skimming 7 pages, I did NOT find any references of "hooker or drunk,".
"Gold digger" was used once, by Staubacher, in context of claiming others felt she was
a gold digger. I didn't search for "liar".

Go back to the original threads on this topic, this is at least the 3rd one and an update.

 

[RoboQB]

There are other threads on the topic. And you are absolutely wrong that no one here has wished harm on her. They have wished for her life to be ruined, sued into oblivion, etc. I guess she doesn't get the benefit of the doubt because of Zeke's girlfriend? Huh?

I'm guessing this was meant for me.
I only see members wishing for the hotel to be sued into oblivion.

You might want to step back and breathe at little bit.
Relax. Be cordial. Zeke's gf was brought up and I responded.
One has nothing to do with the other.

The general opinion from the side you're debating against is that
the hotel overreacted. The rest is mostly being made up by your side of the debate.

 

[RoboQB]

Go back to the original threads on this topic, this is at least the 3rd one and an update.

So, you're saying you're still hung up on week old threads. Ok, lol.
I guess I'll take a look.

 

[Vtwin]

There's plenty of public info on Elliott's girlfriend. It's clear she earned whatever
she's been called on any board. Not sure what was ever said about Jerry's
daughter aside from Garrett seemingly always close to her.

Not all women are perfect lil' flowers. Especially when you factor in young women around pro athletes. Zeke's gf was pissed that he was breaking up with her. The funny part was the texts
between them. You could tell he was afraid to tell her he wanted to part ways. Then, she crashed
his birthday party and went bat-poop crazy. But, that's another story.

Staying on topic, I still tend to believe this was a case where the hotel management
overreacted. And possibly, Irvin also overreacted.

If everyone took one side here, there wouldn't be much to a conversation.
Just two or three people constantly agreeing with each other.
So, the fanboy, women-hater, caveman callout stuff is a bit annoying.
No sane person is wishing harm on anyone.

Uh oh.

You just got classified by the holier than thou as a women hater. There is no tolerance for a middle of the road approach that acknowledges that neither gender has the monopoly on emotionally driven, self-centered behavior. You are now one of the "men who has problems with women."

I'll save you a seat at at the bar.

 

[LatinMind]

Yep but I really think this is coming down to a he said/she said and he's already said he doesn't remember. He is not defending himself since he filed the suit but now that he's filed this suit, he really is on the defense because of what he's already said. He can't even prove he didn't say it through himself with credibility.

Just how stupid is this guy? When he was talking to the radio guys, they hadn't heard anything about what he was talking about and said so. His response? "Well you will be". Yes, from him because his self-importance is so great that he thought the hotel and woman would be racing to the media with this.

There is no business on this planet that can keep better secrets than a hotel. Unless the cops are involved, they're making no comments. There was 0 benefit to them going public. If they had, Irvin might have a stronger suit charging intent to do harm.

But I'd bet the Marriott lawyers are laughing their butts off that Irvin's lawyer is mad as hell. Probably trying to think up new ways to piss him off.

What your ignoring what people are trying to say is, Yes Michael mightve been drunk and he might not remember. But there are witnesses that recall something totally different than what she's claiming. So maybe the video does show them talking but I'm sure it doesn't show anything out of the ordinary or they would've released it if Michael had been grabbing her or she looked visibly disturbed. What I'm sure they're doing is looking into the witnesses because this is a clear he said she said. The big factor is there are witnesses that say it was nothing.

 

[Diehardblues]

We are 7 pages deep. I don't recall seeing a run on comments calling the woman
anything aside from gold digger, which would be inaccurate. Attention seeker, maybe.
We knew from the start that she was an employee. So, "hooker" and "drunk" are
probably not correct. "Skank" is possible, but also doubtful.

If you were asked to move, and were innocent, wouldn't you be pissed? Just sayin'.

If I woke to a knock on my door and was told I'm being removed from the hotel,
I'd definitely make a scene.

But they aren’t just removing or booting you , they are moving you to another hotel .

Irvin says he couldn’t remember what he did or say as had been drinking . How can that be a defense ?

Now if they were kicking him out without a place to go .. Then yes, I’d make a scene .

 

[RoboQB]

Uh oh.

You just got classified by the holier than thou as a women hater. There is no tolerance for a middle of the road approach that acknowledges that neither gender has the monopoly on emotionally driven, self-centered behavior. You are now one of the "men who has problems with women."

I'll save you a seat at at the bar.

Thanks.
I'll bring my wife with me.
She doesn't need a seat. She just sits on my lap... lol.

That is, when she's not scoping out a fight, like "Beth" on Yellowstone...j/k