Michael Irvin releases surveillance video from interaction with hotel employee

Fan Controlled Football Season v2.0 - Championship
Getty Images

As expected, Cowboys Hall of Fame receiver Michael Irvin released on Tuesday the surveillance video secured from Marriott through legal action in Texas.

Michael Gehlken of the Dallas Morning News has posted the full video.

Along with the video, Irvin’s lawyers gave those attending the press conference a presentation with 20 bullet points that raised questions about the incident.

It would make sense to review the Marriott employee’s account (as provided last Friday by Marriott’s lawyers) while watching the video. Reasonable minds may differ as to whether the characterization does or doesn’t mesh with Marriott’s version.

That’s a potential problem for Irvin, frankly. He’s accused of making lewd comments to the employee. He has admitted that he had been drinking. If the employee has told a consistent, unimpeachable story to Marriott management and NFL representative(s) who investigated the situation, it could be difficult to prove that her explanation fails to match the video.

There’s a separate question as to whether hotel management and/or the NFL overreacted to the situation. But Irvin isn’t arguing that. He’s denying that he said what she claims he said. If a jury believes her testimony (and that won’t be known until after she testifies in court), Irvin could be facing an uphill climb.

The discovery process will be critical in this case. Is there evidence of shifting stories and conflicting accounts, or is everything that was said, that was heard, and that was reduced to writing the same?

Here’s why I’ve been wondering about the hotel’s case. Marriott’s stubborn refusal to produce the surveillance video — capped with a blatant violation of a federal court order — has created the impression that Marriott has something to hide. If Marriott had just produced the video and the employee’s version, a much different vibe would have been created.

That’s the key going forward. Will Marriott unveil a bulletproof body of evidence that meshes with the video, or will it eventually seem that a story was concocted to mesh with the video — after a story that conflicted with the video evidence was told?

27 responses to “Michael Irvin releases surveillance video from interaction with hotel employee

  1. From the account last week, it doesn’t seem like the words he said are the issue, its that he put hand(s) on her.

  2. The accuser needs to ensure there is audio of Irvings comments or it’s simply he said / she said. There are 2-3 people who witnessed the interchange and said nothing unusual occurred.

    Marriot would be wise to settle this.

  3. The video does show him reaching out to touch her, shows her stepping back, shows them shaking hands, shows him staring as she walked away and he slaps his face 3 times all described in hers and others testimony.

  4. The video shows Irvin smacking himself in the face three times, corroborating the employees’ stories.

  5. We’ll probably never know exactly why the hotel tried to evade or at least stall producing the video. But before assuming the hotel was up to no good, I try to remember Hanlon’s Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

  6. I saw the video. Did not look anything like what she said happened. Even if maybe he said something sexual (which cannot be proven, and mannerisms show a different type of conversation), it’s words from a drunken man who did nothing to her. Where is the lawsuit there? Irvin should surely walk away clean and win his lawsuit against Mariott. This is easy.

  7. He Said / She Said,… Irvin has a solid case against Marriot. Lewd language isn’t sexual assault. It can be called sexual harassment,.. but not assault.

  8. My mind is already made up. No criminal conviction & Irvin is reinstated my NFL. The civil case against him can be pursued by the employee, if desired. If proven and egregious enough to merit civil penalties, then the NFL might look at potential disciplinary action.

  9. On one hand it’s understandable that Marriott wouldn’t want to proactively escalate any step of this if it could be avoided, but even so, refusing to release the video and then providing a detailed script before the video is released just seems so manipulative.

    This feels like both sides are going to push this far enough that they will both end up looking bad, regardless of the truth.

  10. It’s been 2 months and people yet don’t know who is suing who and for what.

  11. He clearly attempts to touch her four times. And four times you can see her pull away and out some distance between her and him. When she walks away, he points twice in her direction to whomever he was then talking to. And he slaps himself in the face three times. This is very much aligned with her testimony.

    And bear in mind, she’s an employee on duty, and interacting with a high profile guest. She’s going to remain composed. That doesn’t mean she was comfortable with the interaction. What do people expect? That she runs away screaming?

  12. The hotel employee will tell her version of the story and Irvin will tell his version of the story. And Irvin will end his version with, “And that’s exactly what happened. Of course, I was really drunk at the time.”

  13. Looks pretty much as Marriott described. The woman was clearly not comfortable, stepped back several times, etc. Sadly this is stuff women deal with on a near daily basis. No clue how the law works in such cases though….can you be sued for aggressively hitting on someone?

  14. The video doesn’t clear Irvin at all. He looks a little tipsy and handsy. Not the worst I’ve seen, not even close, but nothing in the video to suggest that this was an ordinary encounter between hotel staff with a sober celebrity. Nothing to justify a $100 mil. lawsuit from anyone. Irvin should probably accept a small settlement from the hotel owners and Marriott–for them it’s probably worthwhile to cut a check to make this go away. Disney/ESPN and the NFL should probably pay Irvin to stay home until his contracts expire. I like Irvin on TV, but he’s just too much of a potential risk, and there’s no shortage of loud, opiniated retirees in any pro sport to fill airtime.

  15. Florio,

    Who are these two guys that interjected the conversation? They seem to come out of nowhere in unison, said something to one another, and walked out with Irvin. It appears they wanted to get him out of there and they knew him somehow. Is that the “two witnesses”?

    Also, these things as we know aren’t always isolated (DeShaun watson) so by this point shouldn’t we have heard of other women that have been approached by Irvin in a similar manner??

  16. “..The video shows Irvin smacking himself in the face three times, corroborating the employees’ stories…”

    It corroborates three seconds of the employee’s story.
    In and of itself in no way would convict anybody of anything.
    Is smacking yourself in the face a crime?

  17. We don’t know what happened. My speculation is:
    She told her boss that if Irvin returns she doesn’t want to be his server and relayed what he said. She didn’t know she was getting Irvin fired. Dhe was just trying to avoid being treated disrespectfully – which is perfectly reasonable.

    From there the ball kept getting passed up the food chain, from her boss up through hotel mgmt, all the way to the NFL.

    If I have to choose sides, I’ll pick hers. He’s the one trying to sue. She just wants to do her job without dealing with stupidity from an entitled, geezerly, narcissistic, jerk.

  18. Dallas Morning News turned it off apparently. Now you have to sign up for the “Cowboy Newsletter”.

  19. why I’ve been wondering about the hotel’s case. Marriott’s stubborn refusal to produce the surveillance video — capped with a blatant violation of a federal court order — has created the impression that Marriott has something to hide

    I’m not a lawyer, which means I could be a juror, and I think the opposite. It’s Irvin who’s got something to hide.

  20. I don’t care if they let him go or throw him in jail, just spare sports fans from him on TV

  21. Weird people point out the hotel and employees…who have had access to the video, from day 1, have an accurate account of said video.

  22. I hope he has invested well because he want be working for the Network any longer and the only he’ll get is bagging groceries.

  23. HOF speach: “I wanted to stand in front of my boys and say, Do it like your dad, like any proud dad would want to.”
    I’ll be the first to throw a stone. This guy is a complete hypocrite and apparently always has been and he should be ashamed for the example he has provided to his children.

  24. Look at the video-release issue from the point of view of Marriott’s counsel. “This is not our hotel. We licensed our name, but we have no day-to-day control. If we (Marriott Corporate) release the video, we’ll be saying that we _do_ have control and liability here. It’s up the the franchisee to release the video. We need to stay out of it.” Just spitballing, but having worked in corporate legal, it sure sounds like internal pretzel logic.

  25. Not a fan of Irvin, but just watched the video. He should never have been suspended, and this is disgusting. We will never know what was said or not, but Irvin did nothing wrong. I can’t begin to understand why Marriott is handling it this way, they more than Irvin should want this to go away.

  26. after hearing what the pig said I wish she would have slapped his ugly face and that would have been the end of it.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.