Search results

Please correct me if Im wrong- from what I could find online, the witnesses told reporters they didn't see any inappropriate behavior and that the interaction appeared friendly, but they didn't actually hear the entire conversation. What the witnesses are saying seems to be in line with...

Irvin has to prove Marriott acted with "actual malice" since he is a public figure. That means proving Marriott knew what they were telling the NFL was a lie or they acted with reckless disregard for the truth. And if the manager says the employee described what happened, and then the manager...

Exactly. The video is incomplete and doesn't show the part where he asked about their pronouns.

The issue is that he's a public figure and it's extremely hard for public figures to win defamation cases. He has to show Marriott acted with "actual malice" (basically means they knew they were lying about him or acted with reckless disregard for the truth). Now that the video is out, I just...

I've Gone back and forth on this one. Initially thought it was all BS. Figured the fact that Irvins lawyers wanted the video released would show he didn't do anything wrong. Then more details came out about the accusation, and I thought the "slapping his head three times" detail was peculiar...

Judge told Marriott to "make the videos available." Most reasonable people would interpret that as "give them the videos." Marriott tried to get cute and told Irvins lawyers, "if you want to see the video you need to come to this special room, no more than 3 people allowed, and you aren't...

https://sports.yahoo.com/federal-judge-finds-marriott-blatantly-004823946.html Well, he's got the federal judge on his side right now. Marriott lawyers seriously p issed him off.