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

[RoboQB]

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 .

I believe I stated he was "removed from the hotel".
As in, pack your stuff. We put you in another building. Not this hotel.

Every brain functioning human being would want to know why.

 

[MarcusRock]

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.

You've seen a link that shows exactly what she's claiming? I don't think there is one. Irvin said he was told he said something that warranted being moved out of the hotel. As I've pointed out, video isn't going to show what they said to one another. The witnesses only opined on what they saw, not what they heard. So they're as good as video with no audio, honestly. What a lot are ignoring is that there exists the possibility that something could be said (here or anywhere) that was offensive/off-putting/threatening and the person doesn't react right there in the moment but just completes the conversation and figures out later what to do about it. But we haven't heard the hotel or employee claim anything I don't think.

 

[Diehardblues]

I believe I stated he was "removed from the hotel".
As in, pack your stuff. We put you in another building. Not this hotel.

Every brain functioning human being would want to know why.

Like I said they moved him to another hotel in their family of hotels . Surely they told him there was a complaint .

And since he couldn’t remember the altercation as had been drinking how could he know what he might have said or done ?

 

[LatinMind]

You've seen a link that shows exactly what she's claiming? I don't think there is one. Irvin said he was told he said something that warranted being moved out of the hotel. As I've pointed out, video isn't going to show what they said to one another. The witnesses only opined on what they saw, not what they heard. So they're as good as video with no audio, honestly. What a lot are ignoring is that there exists the possibility that something could be said (here or anywhere) that was offensive/off-putting/threatening and the person doesn't react right there in the moment but just completes the conversation and figures out later what to do about it. But we haven't heard the hotel or employee claim anything I don't think.

Yes they claimed misconduct. The witnesses said nothing is there. Doesn't matter what you point out. So far there are 3 things out on this case. She said he did, he said he didn't, and the witnesses said nothing there. That's all there is. And if you want to look at it like that, and add in them not releasing the video. Wether it be standard practice to do what they're doing. If there's anything there on that video that shows he was inappropriate any law firm would crush him in public opinion.

 

[RoboQB]

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

Lmao. So, I went back to look for any disparaging comments that would offend
women. Especially those who you said you felt a cringe at the thought of them
reading such comments on this board.
The very first questionable post I came across was;

"I'm looking forward to this video more than "Debbie Does the Suburbs:Arlington".
Posted by CouchCoach.

Time to hop off of that horse, Couchy... lol

 

[Diehardblues]

Yes they claimed misconduct. The witnesses said nothing is there. Doesn't matter what you point out. So far there are 3 things out on this case. She said he did, he said he didn't, and the witnesses said nothing there. That's all there is. And if you want to look at it like that, and add in them not releasing the video. Wether it be standard practice to do what they're doing. If there's anything there on that video that shows he was inappropriate any law firm would crush him in public opinion.

Then why do you think the hotel and NFL responded as they did?

 

[CouchCoach]

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.

What is she claiming he said because I do not know?

The video without audio isn't conclusive because she's trained in the service industry on how to handle situations like this in public. Above all, do not escalate them.

Witnesses saw nothing; they also heard nothing and this is about what was said.

 

[CouchCoach]

Lmao. So, I went back to look for any disparaging comments that would offend
women. Especially those who you said you felt a cringe at the thought of them
reading such comments on this board.
The very first questionable post I came across was;

"I'm looking forward to this video more than "Debbie Does the Suburbs:Arlington".
Posted by CouchCoach.

Time to hop off of that horse, Couchy... lol

I do not see that as questionable and if you saw the splendid acting in the first Debbie Does Dallas, you'd know that is not disparaging to women at all. And there is a difference in posting for humor and venom. And I said nothing derogatory about the woman in this case.

You will miss the T.H.O.T posts as I removed them once I looked up what that was an acronym for. I've got to get out more.

 

[TwoDeep3]

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.

And the contrary applies to those who see Irvin as guilty by accusation only. This thread surely is an example of both sides airing their complaints, and in some cases unsubstantiated "facts" to support their bias.

What evidence has been offered to the public in this case which supports either side? Nothing has been made public other than her claim something inappropriate transpired between them. But currently there is nothing in the public view which supports her claim, or him purporting he is innocent.

Seven pages of arguing the facts which have not come out. It would appear after perusing this thread that speculative guilty assignment is a dish best served at any temperature.

 

[MarcusRock]

Yes they claimed misconduct. The witnesses said nothing is there. Doesn't matter what you point out. So far there are 3 things out on this case. She said he did, he said he didn't, and the witnesses said nothing there. That's all there is. And if you want to look at it like that, and add in them not releasing the video. Wether it be standard practice to do what they're doing. If there's anything there on that video that shows he was inappropriate any law firm would crush him in public opinion.

Misconduct such as .... ? Again, Mike himself said it was about what was said. Is video without sound going to bear that out? Will witnesses bear that out only looking at the interaction but hearing nothing specific?

 

[CouchCoach]

Yes they claimed misconduct. The witnesses said nothing is there. Doesn't matter what you point out. So far there are 3 things out on this case. She said he did, he said he didn't, and the witnesses said nothing there. That's all there is. And if you want to look at it like that, and add in them not releasing the video. Wether it be standard practice to do what they're doing. If there's anything there on that video that shows he was inappropriate any law firm would crush him in public opinion.

No, he didn't say he didn't, he said he didn't remember because he'd had a few drinks and if we think that isn't going to be a large part of this for the hotel as well as NFLN, we're mistaken. This is a she said/he can't remember. So, how does he prove he didn't say it?

 

[LatinMind]

Then why do you think the hotel and NFL responded as they did?

Because anything involving misconduct and a woman is going to be guilty until proven innocent in today's times. Probably not a PC thing to say. But everything involving women these days are like this. It seems especially for anything with ties to the Cowboys. Where is the nfl punishment for tyreke Hill fir what he did to his wife. They even had a call with him and his gf, with him telling yeah B you better be scared if me. That should tell you all you need to know about the nfl

 

[CouchCoach]

And the contrary applies to those who see Irvin as guilty by accusation only. This thread surely is an example of both sides airing their complaints, and in some cases unsubstantiated "facts" to support their bias.

What evidence has been offered to the public in this case which supports either side? Nothing has been made public other than her claim something inappropriate transpired between them. But currently there is nothing in the public view which supports her claim, or him purporting he is innocent.

Seven pages of arguing the facts which have not come out. It would appear after perusing this thread that speculative guilty assignment is a dish best served at any temperature.

Oh, it's way more than seven pages, this is at least the 3rd thread because the headline was an update. And God willing, there will be more.

 

[LatinMind]

No, he didn't say he didn't, he said he didn't remember because he'd had a few drinks and if we think that isn't going to be a large part of this for the hotel as well as NFLN, we're mistaken. This is a she said/he can't remember. So, how does he prove he didn't say it?

You're right my bad. It's the witnesses who said he didn't do anything, which is better for him. I did that on purpose so you can say it but, isn't that a common lawyer move misdirection to bring out the third party account? Lol

 

[Diehardblues]

Misconduct such as .... ? Again, Mike himself said it was about what was said. Is video without sound going to bear that out? Will witnesses bear that out only looking at the interaction but hearing nothing specific?

Irvin couldn’t recall what was said because he said he’d been out drinking . He remembered that. And he recalled a handshake .

Video surveillance most likely isn’t going to reveal audio but can view any physical expressions , physical contact, etc.

Most importantly it establishes there was a personal contact which could support her claims . Imagine how sketchy it would be without video surveillance they even made contact.

And that’s probably all the hotel needed to respond to the complaint. That there indeed was contact and Irvin admitted he’s been drinking and couldn’t recall exactly the confrontation . That’s enough for HR to take action.

 

[LatinMind]

Misconduct such as .... ? Again, Mike himself said it was about what was said. Is video without sound going to bear that out? Will witnesses bear that out only looking at the interaction but hearing nothing specific?

Does it look like I know? Again yes he said he didn't remember, but there are third parties who said he didn't do anything. And having that party on your side is big. There are 3 witnesses. The 2 guys and the camera. The camera shows video, the witnesses provide context to that video. That's why they haven't released it. Don't let people or don't try to be smarter than what's been released. Because so far everything that's come out is in Irvin favor.

 

[CouchCoach]

Then why do you think the hotel and NFL responded as they did?

The hotel has a protocol to follow in these situations. How many female employees with the Marriott hotels do we think have heard inappropriate comments from male guests? We do not know if this is a first time for this woman.

 

[DallasEast]

Has Irvin's attorney received the surveillance video yet? I hope so. The clock is ticking before mad eventually becomes anger. Then he will turn green and starts rampaging inside some random Marriott hotel somewhere.

Trust me. No one would not like him when he's angry.

 

[RoboQB]

Irvin couldn’t recall what was said because he said he’d been out drinking . He remembered that. And he recalled a handshake .

Video surveillance most likely isn’t going to reveal audio but can view any physical expressions , physical contact, etc.

Most importantly it establishes there was a personal contact which could support her claims . Imagine how sketchy it would be without video surveillance they even made contact.

And that’s probably all the hotel needed to respond to the complaint. That there indeed was contact and Irvin admitted he’s been drinking and couldn’t recall exactly the confrontation . That’s enough for HR to take action.

And by "contact" you mean they shook hands and parted ways.
Why try to jumble things up? "Oh, something was said. It HAS to be bad."

 

[Diehardblues]

Because anything involving misconduct and a woman is going to be guilty until proven innocent in today's times. Probably not a PC thing to say. But everything involving women these days are like this. It seems especially for anything with ties to the Cowboys. Where is the nfl punishment for tyreke Hill fir what he did to his wife. They even had a call with him and his gf, with him telling yeah B you better be scared if me. That should tell you all you need to know about the nfl

No doubt and in todays culture it’s to be expected especially with someone with Irvin’s sexual abuse history. Probably wouldn’t have happened if it was Troy or Emmitt for example.