Official Michael Irvin* Sues Marriott for $100 Million

[theibisrules]

He's got their collective a$$e$ in a sling...no wiggle room for the nfl and espn either.

 

[ben]

IF Marriott can back this up, not a great look...

Marriott Claims Michael Irvin Touched Female Accuser And Ask If She Knew Anything About Having A “Black Man Inside Her,” Accuse Former WR Of Making False Statements

Hotel chain Marriott is now sharing disturbing details of a female employee's allegations against Michael Irvin

www.totalprosports.com

"...Marriott Claims Michael Irvin Touched Female Accuser And Ask If She Knew Anything About Having A “Black Man Inside Her,” Accuse Former WR Of Making False Statements..."​

IF they are inaccurate, Michael Irving and Michael Irvin should increase the suit to $1B.

He then “slapped himself in the face three times, saying ‘keep it together Mike.’”


see that sounds fake to me. we all know michael irvin doesnt do four-word pump-up speeches.

 

[Cryptical Envelopment]

Marriott digging in with specifics and claiming a witness who heard the convo when there is tape should give everyone a bit of concern. It would be insane for them and their attorneys to make something up that could be instantly disproven with the other evidence. They are a publicly traded company and are thus prone to being risk-adverse.

On the other hand, it was strange they were trying to keep the tape from being released.

This whole thing smells in 200 different ways.

 

[Empirical Cane]

He then “slapped himself in the face three times, saying ‘keep it together Mike.’”


see that sounds fake to me. we all know michael irvin doesnt do four-word pump-up speeches.

I thought it was odd too.

I would have assume he would have added something about Stanley Shakespeare and not holding up his **** that he gave him.

Also, when this goes to trial, Warren Sapp is going to be a surprise witness and he, Irving, and Irvin are going to form a Voltron-esque "U" when Mike gets the big dub-u.

 

[rsa coral gables]

Federal judge finds Marriott “blatantly” violated court order in Michael Irvin case

Hall of Fame receiver Michael Irvin may not ultimately prevail in his case against Marriott, but he’s currently winning. Via Michael Gehlken of the Dallas Morning News, a federal judge concluded that Marriott “blatantly” violated an order requiring the company to surrender surveillance video to...

sports.yahoo.com

Well, he's got the federal judge on his side right now. Marriott lawyers seriously p issed him off.

the hubris of some attorneys. the discovery order obligate marriott to produce a copy of the video and other recordings with x days. marriott notified irvin's counsel that the discovery material was available and that they could inspect it at marriott's attorney's offices as long as they did not bring any recording devices including phones. what f!@cking arrogance. i hope the court sanctions the living **** out of them.

 

[datcaneguy]

A couple of things to add into you consideration:

1. Miles (the Bama basketball player who owned the gun) texted Miller and told him to bring the gun. Now, you and I can recall fact patterns from law school (particularly Evidence) when silence can be inferred to mean something when someone would have/should have otherwise been under a duty to speak, so I tend to think that the claim of "absolute ignorance" is at least questionable and debatable when you get a text to "bring the gun and leave the cannoli".

2. Miller is trying to make the claim that he was only at the murder site to "pick up" Miles. However, instead of Miles getting in the front seat and leaving with Miller, he rummaged around in the back seat until he found the gun. Again, that may not be ABSOLUTE proof that Miller knew what was about to happen, but it at least need to be explored, and I have no idea why the Tuscaloosa police and prosecutors are approaching the investigation so weakly.

3. And don't even get me started on the most recent Alabama game, with the "patdown" humor. Further proof that Miller simply does not comprehend the seriousness of his involvement IN A MURDER.

He’s good at basketball. Just leaving room to go back and implicate him if he gets out of line and gets to big for his britches

 

[Canes1968]

The cameras don’t have audio.

They can probably prove he touched her; bu intent and sound are not there.

That’s all subjective.

If the physical actions match the description, going to be hard for anyone to say Marriott isn't right here.

 

[Empirical Cane]

the hubris of some attorneys. the discovery order obligate marriott to produce a copy of the video and other recordings with x days. marriott notified irvin's counsel that the discovery material was available and that they could inspect it at marriott's attorney's offices as long as they did not bring any recording devices including phones. what f!@cking arrogance. i hope the court sanctions the living **** out of them.

Im not following...who did wrong here??

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

If the physical actions match the description, going to be hard for anyone to say Marriott isn't right here.

Unless they have actual tape documenting the alleged verbal exchange, there’s nothing that would tell me that they’re right here.

 

[The canesman]

I guess it’s time for some tears and jesus

 

[Ghandi]

If the physical actions match the description, going to be hard for anyone to say Marriott isn't right here.

Are you suggesting that the subtle physical queues can be seen from a hotel hallway camera?

If you are, I’d like to know what line of work you do.

 

[Ghandi]

Im not following...who did wrong here??

Turn it over means give it to them.

It’s not a supervised review of the info with layers of interpretation.

I’m all for pushing the definition of vague legal instruction to its limit, but you run the risk of getting a nasty reaction like this one

 

[rsa coral gables]

Im not following...who did wrong here??

judge orders marriott's attorneys to deliver a copy of the video to the plaintiff's attorneys within x days

marriott's attorneys tell plaintiff's attorneys we are not going to deliver a copy to you but you can come to our office if you want to see the video as long as you leave any and all recording devices including your phone at the front desk.

plaintiff's attorneys complain to the judge that marriott and its attorneys blatantly disregarded the judge's orders

judge gets ****ed and instructs marriott's attorney to deliver a copy of the video and then admonishes marriott and its counsel.

 

[Empirical Cane]

judge orders marriott's attorneys to deliver a copy of the video to the plaintiff's attorneys within x days

marriott's attorneys tell plaintiff's attorneys we are not going to deliver a copy to you but you can come to our office if you want to see the video as long as you leave any and all recording devices including your phone at the front desk.

plaintiff's attorneys complain to the judge that marriott and its attorneys blatantly disregarded the judge's orders

judge gets ****ed and instructs marriott's attorney to deliver a copy of the video and then admonishes marriott and its counsel.

Does Judge Wapner not suffer this foolishness very well?

How do you think he might rule in this case?

 

[Calinative]

The cameras don’t have audio.

They can probably prove he touched her; bu intent and sound are not there.

That’s all subjective.

Think one of the witnessess said he shook hands and touched her elbow and were all laughing....

So yeah I don't think Irvin is saying he never touched her period. There is touching, and then there is touching... The inapropriate variety is what is being implied. So If lady and a witness claims that he touched her then said inappropriate stuff, I'd say merely shaking hands or randomly touching her arm/elbow while telling a joke/story/laughing isn't touching as implied.

 

[Empirical Cane]

Think one of the witnessess said he shook hands and touched her elbow and were all laughing....

So yeah I don't think Irvin is saying he never touched her period. There is touching, and then there is touching... The inapropriate variety is what is being implied. So If lady and a witness claims that he touched her then said inappropriate stuff, I'd say merely shaking hands or randomly touching her arm/elbow while telling a joke/story/laughing isn't touching as implied.

 

[Handsome Squidbum]

Im not following...who did wrong here??

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 able to record or make a copy of what you see." Judge was livid because he knew they were playing games.

 

[rsa coral gables]

Does Judge Wapner not suffer this foolishness very well?

How do you think he might rule in this case?

ultimately the judge gets to rule over the prosecution and defense of the case. the jury decides if there was defamation and damages. very likely it gets settled once everything calms down a bit. marriott doesn't need the bad publicity.

 

[theibisrules]

Welp while you are looking, looks like the judge agreed with what I said earlier. If I am #88, I sue ESPN and NFL NETWORK because just getting my job back isnt enough, I cant trust them at all, the relationship is severed.

 

[bacane]

We're talking about a great player & great Cane, but Irvin's track record only complicates the situation. His version may be entirely correct. Hope it is.