ESPN and Mike Irvin? (1 Viewer)

[simey]

Disney doesn't let its emplyees remove their giant costume heads in public let alone keep (their friend's) crack pipes in their cars. He's done at ESPN.

I wasn't aware it was a crack pipe. I've only read that it was a drug pipe. It never stated what type of resin was in it.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Irvin producing a clean urine sample would impress me no more than a pedophile pointing out that at the moment he is not violating a child. The snapshot into their life is too temporary to extrapolate to a global set of behavior. It's very easy if the drug of choice is cocaine to produce a clean urine sample. If he wants to convince me he can have the below linked company do a hair and fingernail analysis and make those results public.

http://www.gdtsrv.com/testing.cfm

 

[Kleck]

Sounds like he's guilty until proven innocent. His story sounds very plausible to me.

 

[Maulers]

Irvin has grown on me this year. He provides enough analysis without being as combative as Sterling Sharpe was (and still is on NFL network). Personally I like both of them as analyists. Sharpe is much more clear and presents his points very well. Irvin is quite comical but gets his point across.What concerns me more about this is that Irvin has cleaned up his act and has turned his life over to Christ. Everyone stumbles in their walk and deserves forgiveness if they repent. If he is not being truthful about the claim of it being a friend's pipe I am much more concerned about the lying and the cover up. Piling one lie upon another is never the answer.

 

[tick dog]

Disney doesn't let its emplyees remove their giant costume heads in public let alone keep (their friend's) crack pipes in their cars. He's done at ESPN.

I wasn't aware it was a crack pipe. I've only read that it was a drug pipe. It never stated what type of resin was in it.

Crack pipe, hash pipe, weed one-hitter, whatever. It's all drugs to Disney.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Hi.

Thank you for your e-mail. It has been successfully routed to a customer

service representative.

Due to the large volume of e-mail we receive, we are unable to respond

to general comments, but they will be passed on to the appropriate

network executives.

If you have submitted a specific question that cannot be answered by

visiting our FAQ area

(http://sports.espn.go.com/sitetools/s/help/espn-faq.html), we look

forward to responding as quickly as possible. Occasionally, we need to

do additional research, which can slightly delay our response or require

us to contact you.

If your comment or question is about a different area of ESPN such as

the Magazine, Radio, International or ESPN.com, please visit this site

so your message can be re-directed:

http://espn.go.com/sitetools/s/contact/index.html

For immediate help, you can call our customer service representatives,

who are generally available during normal business hours, at

860-766-2236.

P.S. Would you like to continue to express your opinions about ESPN and

play a part in the programming decisions that get made? Come join the

ESPN Viewer Panel where you can take surveys and earn prizes. Please go

to http://www.espnviewerzone.com to sign up. You must complete the

registration process to qualify.

Thanks!!

 

[Raskell5]

I love this. This is for all you "Tree Hugging, Pot Smoking, Liberal, Hippy Freaks". These facts are undisputable and non PC. 1- Michael Irvin is a drug addict. Sorry, it's a fact. Whether he's been clean or not. Once an addict always an addict. One of the first things you learn in AA.2- He possessed a Crack Pipe in his car which means he was either smoking or was around someone smoking. Something an addict is obviously not supposed to do.3- The clown had a warrant for his arrest. And along with his BS statement of the "Crack Pipe was my friends", he throws out "I thought I paid that ticket". Please. The general public is smarter than that.4- We're talking about him losing his job. This isn't a court of law. There's no judge or lawyers. There is no trial, plea bargain, or acquittal. When you are employed, there are certain rules you are supposed to follow. Smoking crack, possessing drug paraphernalia, hanging with friends who are crackheads are probably in there somewhere. Especially when employed by the Disney Corp.5- HE IS REALLY ANNOYING AND IGNORANTHave fun with this.

 

[Wheelhouse]

Michael Irvin -

 

[RC94]

Sounds like he's guilty until proven innocent. His story sounds very plausible to me.

His "it's not mine, it's my friend's" excuse sounds plausible to you??

 

[Da Guru]

The reason this whole thing happened is that Irvin had a unpaid speeding ticket..so when he was pulled over there was a warrant for his arrest...that led to searching the car. Had Mike paid his ticket none of this would have happened.That being said I think ESPN will part ways with Irvin. Guys who can do what Mike does on the show are a dime a dozen. Just get another ex-NFL player to scream and yell and make faces.

 

[Kleck]

Sounds like he's guilty until proven innocent. His story sounds very plausible to me.

His "it's not mine, it's my friend's" excuse sounds plausible to you??

Sure. Do I think he had friends that did drugs? Yes. Do I think he completely broke ties with all of them? No.I said it was plausible. I didn't say I believed him. I'm not so eager to string him up. Why are you?

Opinions don't matter here. There are some simple tests to prove whether or not he's still using. How can you take anything other than a "wait and see" approach?

 

[Krewe]

Mike and TO can hang out together and watch on Sundays the rest of the season.Bet they wont be grillin' while they're chillin'

 

[Limecuda]

Sounds like he's guilty until proven innocent. His story sounds very plausible to me.

His "it's not mine, it's my friend's" excuse sounds plausible to you??

Sure. Do I think he had friends that did drugs? Yes. Do I think he completely broke ties with all of them? No.I said it was plausible. I didn't say I believed him. I'm not so eager to string him up. Why are you?

Opinions don't matter here. There are some simple tests to prove whether or not he's still using. How can you take anything other than a "wait and see" approach?

 

[4thAndForever]

Sounds like he's guilty until proven innocent. His story sounds very plausible to me.

His "it's not mine, it's my friend's" excuse sounds plausible to you??

Sure. Do I think he had friends that did drugs? Yes. Do I think he completely broke ties with all of them? No.I said it was plausible. I didn't say I believed him. I'm not so eager to string him up. Why are you?

Opinions don't matter here. There are some simple tests to prove whether or not he's still using. How can you take anything other than a "wait and see" approach?

He's Michael Irvin, and we're a pitchfork-and-flaming-torches-mob-mentality crowd. And quite frankly, I wouldn't have it any other way.

 

[Kleck]

He's Michael Irvin, and we're a pitchfork-and-flaming-torches-mob-mentality crowd. And quite frankly, I wouldn't have it any other way.

So noted. This post reaffirms my opinion of you.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Sounds like he's guilty until proven innocent. His story sounds very plausible to me.

His "it's not mine, it's my friend's" excuse sounds plausible to you??

Sure. Do I think he had friends that did drugs? Yes. Do I think he completely broke ties with all of them? No.I said it was plausible. I didn't say I believed him. I'm not so eager to string him up. Why are you?

Opinions don't matter here. There are some simple tests to prove whether or not he's still using. How can you take anything other than a "wait and see" approach?

Plausible that he still has doper friends, certainly. Plausible in his story, only to the most gullible people around. I guess it must have gone something like this.DIND DONG

Mrs. Irvin: "Micheal check who is at the door."

Micheal: "O.K. sweetie."

Micheal crosses to front door and opens it to find DopeMaster C.

DopeMaster C: "My *****. Ah jus gots out of rehab n thought Ah cud chills wid you and your #####."

Micheal: "Well I'll speak to my wife."

DopeMaster C: "#### ***** you don't haf ta shout. Iz standing right here. Ah can hear you."

Micheal: "Honey, can DopeMaster C stay for Thanksgiving dinner?"

Mrs. Irvin: "You don't have to shout Micheal, I'm only five rooms away. I can hear you just fine. I guess DopeMaster C can stay, but only if that fool is off the pipe."

Micheal: "Are you clean 'C'?"

DopeMaster C: "Hell yeah. Alls Ah'm holding is dis crack pipe, and dat's not for smoking, it's jus a sentimental momento of my days when Ah was rocking up and ho'ing."

Micheal: "Well we don't want that kind of thing around our kids. You know how I feel about drugs."

DopeMaster C: "Man you funny. No problem dawg, Ah dig dat your ##### be listening.. Ah'll just throw it in da trash."

Micheal: "No good "C". Do you have any idea how frequently my kids go through the trash? You would think with my millions they would already have everything they want without looking through the trash for more, but I just can't keep them out of there."

DopeMaster C: "Well jus stomp on it. It's glass, it will shatter. We'll sweep it up and dats dat."

Micheal: "No good 'C' This mansion does not have a broom, vacuum or shop vac anywhere. I know..., though I have active warrants, and though I have a past drug history, I'll risk my reputation for you by driving this pipe to a supermarket to toss it in a dumpster there."

DopeMaster C: "Good plan dawg. Jus don't forget you gots it in your glovebox. How would it look if you got caught?"

Micheal: "That will never happen."

Meanwhile down stairs in the rec room trying to watch videos and wearing headphones to drown out Micheal's voice are Micheal's kids.

Child 1: "Can you believe Dad thinks we can't hear him. What the hell does he think he's protecting us from? Like we would use the pipe of some aging, crackhead who has been with every whore in the state."

Child 2: "Just crank up the music louder, maybe you can drown him out. Frankly if I have to hear his friend 'C' trot out one more Stuart Scott expression in an attempt to sound 'black' I just might turn to the pipe."

Child 1: "Do you think Dad's connection would give us a family discount?"

Child 2: "Word Dawg."

Both kids fall out laughing.

 

[RC94]

Sounds like he's guilty until proven innocent. His story sounds very plausible to me.

His "it's not mine, it's my friend's" excuse sounds plausible to you??

Sure. Do I think he had friends that did drugs? Yes. Do I think he completely broke ties with all of them? No.I said it was plausible. I didn't say I believed him. I'm not so eager to string him up. Why are you?

Opinions don't matter here. There are some simple tests to prove whether or not he's still using. How can you take anything other than a "wait and see" approach?

Where did I "string him up?" When exactly did I show an eagerness to do so? I don't think he is good at his current job, but I never said that he was guilty of anything else. Don't put words in my mouth. I was just asking a simple question and you jump down my throat. I know it is difficult for you, but you really should think before you write and certainly before you go around criticizing people.

 

[Kleck]

Where did I "string him up?"  When exactly did I show an eagerness to do so?  I don't think he is good at his current job, but I never said that he was guilty of anything else.  Don't put words in my mouth.  I was just asking a simple question and you jump down my throat.  I know it is difficult for you, but you really should think before you write and certainly before you go around criticizing people.

You're right. You didn't say "string him up". My apologies. I didn't see that as "jumping down your throat".No need to be nasty. How exactly is is difficult for me? I said, "I'm not so eager to string him up. Why are you?" A simple, "I'm not eager to string him up" would have sufficed.

Do you agree that this is a need to wait and see situation?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Do you agree that this is a need to wait and see situation?

This is a "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining" situation.

 

[Shark Attack]

Thoughts on this? Obviously, ESPN has shown a track record that it will make a move when hosts say or do things that are not in line with how they expect one to represent them. Does Irvin stay at ESPN?

J

well he is working tonights game so i guess the 1 week option is out now. Irvin is claiming it was his "friends" pipe so i would guess they have to give him the benefit of the doubt at this point. I am wondering if ESPN can ask him to submit for a drug screen to keep his job or if he is volunteering to do it? Crack only stays in the system a few days so timing would be key here. I am just not so sure he is a good enough on air personality to keep this job beyond this year at ESPN after this. I do know that Troy Aikman would be a perfect replacement but is one of the best commentators there is now and might be hard to pry away from Fox because of it. I personally would love to see Aikman on that Sunday ESPN team and for sure replacing Theisman on the new MNF team is its key commentator (dam what a nice thought that is I despise Theisman as a commentator he is going to kill MNF)S

 

[Wheelhouse]

Sounds like he's guilty until proven innocent. His story sounds very plausible to me.

His "it's not mine, it's my friend's" excuse sounds plausible to you??

Sure. Do I think he had friends that did drugs? Yes. Do I think he completely broke ties with all of them? No.I said it was plausible. I didn't say I believed him. I'm not so eager to string him up. Why are you?

Opinions don't matter here. There are some simple tests to prove whether or not he's still using. How can you take anything other than a "wait and see" approach?

Plausible that he still has doper friends, certainly. Plausible in his story, only to the most gullible people around. I guess it must have gone something like this.DIND DONG

Mrs. Irvin: Micheal check who is at the door.

Micheal: O.K. sweetie.

Micheal crosses to front door and opens it to find DopeMaster C.

DopeMaster C: My *****. Jus gots out of rehab n thought Ah cud chills wid you and your #####.

Micheal: Well I'll speak to my wife.

DopeMaster C: #### ***** you don't haf ta shout. Iz standing right here. Ah can hear you.

Micheal: Honey, can DopeMaster C stay for thanksgiving dinner?

Mrs. Irvin: You don't have to shout Micheal, I'm only five rooms away. I can hear you just fine. I guess DopeMaster C can stay, but only if that fool is off the pipe.

Micheal: Are you clean "C"?

DopeMaster C: Hell yeah. Alls Ah'm holding is dis crack pipe, and dat's not for smoking, it's jus a sentimental momento of my days when Ah was rocking up and ho'ing.

Micheal: Well we don't want that kind of thing around our kids.

DopeMaster C: No problem dawg. Ah'll just throw it in da trash.

Micheal: No good "C". Do you have any idea how frequently my kids go through the trash? You would think with my millions they would have everything they want without looking through the trash for more but I just can't keep them out of there.

DopeMaster C: Well jus stomp on it. It's glass, it will shatter. We'll sweep it up and dats dat.

Micheal: No good "C" This mansion does not have a broom, vacuum or shop vac anywhere. I know, though I have active warrants, and though I have a past drug history; I'll risk my reputation for you by driving this pipe to a supermarket to toss it in a dumpster there.

DopeMaster C; Good plan dawg. Jus don't forget you gots it in your glovebox. How would it look if you got caught?

Micheal: That will never happen.

Meanwhile down stairs in the rec room trying to watch videos and wearing headphones to drown out Micheal's voice are Micheal's kids.

Child 1: Can you believe Dad thinks we can't hear him. What the hell does he think he's protecting us from? Like we would use the pipe of some aging, crackhead who has been with every whore in the state.

Child 2: Just crank up the music louder, maybe you can drown him out.

Quality post

 

[BlueOnion]

Wow, fired from his job because they found a crack pipe in his car?  I agree that he's not a very good announcer but the punishment needs to fit the crime here.

You don't think it does?

Do they do the same thing if one of the other guys gets charged (any Sportscenter guy)??

I am just saying if you do your job in front of the public, than your public perception is very important.Much like if a candy store hires a guy to make a candy in the front window, I don't think it is that big of a deal if the guy picks his nose and then washes his hands before making the candy. However, others may feel differently and I could understand if the candy store canned the nose-picker.

 

[njxbean]

Innocent until proven guilty. thats the bottom line. And im glad ESPN is taking that stance. And shame on everyone else who is ASSUMING otherwise.

 

[Shark Attack]

Ditka to me is the obvious choice. Berman, QB, Defensive guy and a coach would give a good balance. He's outspoken and entertaining like Irvin so they'd have that angle.

Could also see them bringing in Mortensen to the desk with the other three and maybe getting Clayton off the games and doing the role Mortensen does now.

J

I say give Troy Aikman whatever he wants to do it and also be the MNF commentator.

 

[Wilbur Wood]

I love this. This is for all you "Tree Hugging, Pot Smoking, Liberal, Hippy Freaks". These facts are undisputable and non PC.

1- Michael Irvin is a drug addict. Sorry, it's a fact. Whether he's been clean or not. Once an addict always an addict. One of the first things you learn in AA.

What evidence is there that Michael Irvin is an "addict"? The % of people that have used marijuana/cocaine that are "drug addicts" is very low. Not much higher than the % of people that have "felt good" on booze that are alcoholics. The Sports Media has historically rushed to label any athlete busted for drugs as an "addict in need of rehab" and the athletes have readily embraced this label because it provides convenient cover to label their drug use as a "disease" that is hard-wired into their DNA and thus they are not responsible for their actions.

p.s. I am suspicious of Irvin's alibi, although I seem to recall that Randy Moss successfully ran this route a few years back in Minnesota in that infamous encounter with the Meter Maid.

 

[4thAndForever]

He's Michael Irvin, and we're a pitchfork-and-flaming-torches-mob-mentality crowd.  And quite frankly, I wouldn't have it any other way.

So noted. This post reaffirms my opinion of you.

You're making me blush.

 

[Shark Attack]

I honestly don't think most people will find the story very plausible. "It wasn't mine" is the standard answer for this situation. The fact he felt driving around with it in his car could somehow keep it from his kids better than putting it in his trash doesn't wash very well.

Either way, it's important to note that ESPN isn't a court or looking for a crime. There is no innocent before proven guilty with them. The reality is what has happened already. A high profile employee with a history of trouble has been arrested with a pipe in his car. They are dealing with that.

The next shoe to drop will likely be the "friend" surfacing and claiming responsibility and ownership. I'd expect that to happen before Countdown airs tonight.

J

Then only way he can save himself is to immediately allow a drug screen to be done on him. that would tell the whole truth ands nothing but the truth.

 

[Shark Attack]

If (and it's a big "if") Michael Irvin is telling the truth (and I'm not judging), one would think it would be VERY simple for him to prove.

Voluntarily submit to a drug test and make the results public.

BINGO

 

[dudaman]

Does having a pipe with drug resin in your posession make you guilty? Any lawyers out there defend or prosecute a case like this? It seems to me that the police have better things to do than chase him for something as stupid as this - unless you can prosecute him for being stupid. Plea-bargain?

 

[Shark Attack]

Disney doesn't let its emplyees remove their giant costume heads in public let alone keep (their friend's) crack pipes in their cars. He's done at ESPN.

I wasn't aware it was a crack pipe. I've only read that it was a drug pipe. It never stated what type of resin was in it.

if there was resin i think he would be charged for possession for whatever it was as well

 

[Shark Attack]

Irvin producing a clean urine sample would impress me no more than a pedophile pointing out that at the moment he is not violating a child. The snapshot into their life is too temporary to extrapolate to a global set of behavior. It's very easy if the drug of choice is cocaine to produce a clean urine sample. If he wants to convince me he can have the below linked company do a hair and fingernail analysis and make those results public.

http://www.gdtsrv.com/testing.cfm

That test can tell if anyone has ever done a drug, no matter when it was. if he smoked a joint when he was 18 it would come up. I don't think it can tell when was the last usage of a drug, which would be key here.

 

[Raskell5]

I love this. This is for all you "Tree Hugging, Pot Smoking, Liberal, Hippy Freaks". These facts are undisputable and non PC.

1- Michael Irvin is a drug addict. Sorry, it's a fact. Whether he's been clean or not. Once an addict always an addict. One of the first things you learn in AA.

What evidence is there that Michael Irvin is an "addict"? The % of people that have used marijuana/cocaine that are "drug addicts" is very low. Not much higher than the % of people that have "felt good" on booze that are alcoholics. The Sports Media has historically rushed to label any athlete busted for drugs as an "addict in need of rehab" and the athletes have readily embraced this label because it provides convenient cover to label their drug use as a "disease" that is hard-wired into their DNA and thus they are not responsible for their actions.

p.s. I am suspicious of Irvin's alibi, although I seem to recall that Randy Moss successfully ran this route a few years back in Minnesota in that infamous encounter with the Meter Maid.

Seriously? What color is the sky in your world?

 

[simey]

Disney doesn't let its emplyees remove their giant costume heads in public let alone keep (their friend's) crack pipes in their cars. He's done at ESPN.

I wasn't aware it was a crack pipe. I've only read that it was a drug pipe. It never stated what type of resin was in it.

if there was resin i think he would be charged for possession for whatever it was as well

No, you have to have more than resin to be charged with possession of whatever the drug was in the pipe.

 

[Slinger]

I just heard him on the Dan Patrick Show. He kinda jumped around the "Will you take a drug test" question. Until he takes a drug test and pass I'm going to assume guilt.

 

[4thAndForever]

Irvin producing a clean urine sample would impress me no more than a pedophile pointing out that at the moment he is not violating a child.  The snapshot into their life is too temporary to extrapolate to a global set of behavior.  It's very easy if the drug of choice is cocaine to produce a clean urine sample.  If he wants to convince me he can have the below linked company do a hair and fingernail analysis and make those results public.

http://www.gdtsrv.com/testing.cfm

That test can tell if anyone has ever done a drug, no matter when it was. if he smoked a joint when he was 18 it would come up. I don't think it can tell when was the last usage of a drug, which would be key here.

What is this miracle test you speak of?

 

[Godsbrother]

I just heard him on the Dan Patrick Show. He kinda jumped around the "Will you take a drug test" question. Until he takes a drug test and pass I'm going to assume guilt.

I thought he danced around the question, too. I think he's guilty.

 

[simey]

Does having a pipe with drug resin in your posession make you guilty? Any lawyers out there defend or prosecute a case like this? It seems to me that the police have better things to do than chase him for something as stupid as this - unless you can prosecute him for being stupid. Plea-bargain?

I was on a jury 2 years ago for a guy being charged with having a crack pipe on him with a little bit of resin. He was a known offender, and a cop who knew him saw him one night, put a flashlight on the guy and the guy took off running, and he was caught and he had a crack pipe. The case didn't even last a day. The judge threw it out, and told the prosecutor to quit wasting his time, and told the officer to quit harrassing known offenders. Also, my brother got pulled for speeding several years ago while driving through North or South Dakota, and he got a ticket for having drug paraphernalia. He just had to pay the fine, but they took his pot pipe which was a gift given to him. A friend of his had carved him a pipe out of some special wood. As for Irvin's story, my brother switched cars with me several years ago for 2 weeks. A couple months later I found a pot pipe tucked inside a back pouch behind the drivers seat. If I had been pulled and my car searched, I would have gotten a ticket for drug paraphernalia and it wasn't my pipe. Anyway, sometimes people really aren't guilty.

 

[theToes]

Does having a pipe with drug resin in your posession make you guilty?  Any lawyers out there defend or prosecute a case like this?  It seems to me that the police have better things to do than chase him for something as stupid as this - unless you can prosecute him for being stupid.  Plea-bargain?

I was on a jury 2 years ago for a guy being charged with having a crack pipe on him with a little bit of resin. He was a known offender, and a cop who knew him saw him one night, put a flashlight on the guy and the guy took off running, and he was caught and he had a crack pipe. The case didn't even last a day. The judge threw it out, and told the prosecutor to quit wasting his time, and told the officer to quit harrassing known offenders. Also, my brother got pulled for speeding several years ago while driving through North or South Dakota, and he got a ticket for having drug paraphernalia. He just had to pay the fine, but they took his pot pipe which was a gift given to him. A friend of his had carved him a pipe out of some special wood. As for Irvin's story, my brother switched cars with me several years ago for 2 weeks. A couple months later I found a pot pipe tucked inside a back pouch behind the drivers seat. If I had been pulled and my car searched, I would have gotten a ticket for drug paraphernalia and it wasn't my pipe. Anyway, sometimes people really aren't guilty.

Irvin didn't borrow the car, it was his car. And we are not talking about if he will get convicted of any posession charges, we are simply talking about if a family oriented entertainment company will take any action against a high profile employee that was caught in a ituation that will reflect poorly on the company.

 

[RC94]

Where did I "string him up?"  When exactly did I show an eagerness to do so?  I don't think he is good at his current job, but I never said that he was guilty of anything else.  Don't put words in my mouth.  I was just asking a simple question and you jump down my throat.  I know it is difficult for you, but you really should think before you write and certainly before you go around criticizing people.

You're right. You didn't say "string him up". My apologies. I didn't see that as "jumping down your throat".No need to be nasty. How exactly is is difficult for me? I said, "I'm not so eager to string him up. Why are you?" A simple, "I'm not eager to string him up" would have sufficed.

Do you agree that this is a need to wait and see situation?

Of course this is a wait and see situation. However, that doesn't mean I have to believe his excuse or even think it is plausable. It sounds like BS to me, but I will still wait and see. I think he should be fired anyway, but that is because he is the worst analyst on TV, regardless of the station.

 

[simey]

Irvin didn't borrow the car, it was his car. And we are not talking about if he will get convicted of any posession charges, we are simply talking about if a family oriented entertainment company will take any action against a high profile employee that was caught in a ituation that will reflect poorly on the company.

It was MY car that had the pipe in it after my brother had borrowed it. I also realize the thread isn't about if he will get convicted of possession charges, although I was addressing what someone else had said about possession charges in this thread.

 

[Marc Levin]

I'll give an opinion likely already delivered in the last three pages - Irvin's gone.Not 'cause of the pipe.'cause ESPN finally figured out thier entire broadcast and countdown crew gives a pale imitation of real analysis and ESPN raids the NFL Network's cupboard fro people with true insight.The only ESPN NFL guy with a modicum of brains is Tom Jackson - Michael Irvin may be the single worst analyst on TV - and that, not the pipe, is what'll cost him his job.(plus, backing TO's moves at every turn will probably get him ax'd too - guilt by association)

 

[scoobygang]

I'll give an opinion likely already delivered in the last three pages - Irvin's gone.

Not 'cause of the pipe.

'cause ESPN finally figured out thier entire broadcast and countdown crew gives a pale imitation of real analysis and ESPN raids the NFL Network's cupboard fro people with true insight.

The only ESPN NFL guy with a modicum of brains is Tom Jackson - Michael Irvin may be the single worst analyst on TV - and that, not the pipe, is what'll cost him his job.

(plus, backing TO's moves at every turn will probably get him ax'd too - guilt by association)

This is exactly why I'd be upset if Irvin were gone and he weren't replaced by a guy who shared a similar perspective.Tom Jackson is fine at what he does. I don't need another guy to echo what he says. I certainly don't need the dozens of guys were currently have on TV drone on the same stuff about "no I in team" or "clubhouse chemistry" or whatever else.

It's cliched, and more importantly, I think it's often wrong. Football is meritocracy, and great players ARE routinely treated differently by virtue of their talent and production.

I get that I'm in the minority on this, but I don't think it takes a lot of analysis to mouth the same platitudes every one else is. Maybe Irvin is a reflexive contrarian, but I'm glad we have someone like that around. And seeing as how I don't care whether he takes drugs or not, I feel a bit bad for the guy. As I am in the minority, I imagine ESPN will axe him. That's cool. It's their decision to make.

 

[Marc Levin]

i don't see him as a reflexive contrarian - in fact, I believe he parrots what he hears from the other analysts - he just says it louder and with different "pedestrian" words.He is, IMO, not intelligent, and not insightful.Contrary opinions are fine - listening to Terrel Davis and Rod Woodson debate completely opposite sides of the same issue on NFL Network is WHY I watch that show.I don't want a TJacks clone - I want someone with half a football brain in their head giving me their opinion. Butch Davis and the NFL Network's Playbook crew run circles around the ENTIRE ESPN staff - all of them - every single one. And those guys do not share opinions - they are widely divergent on style of football play and on analysis.Don't project that just b/c I think TJackson is the only decent analyst at ESPN that I want a bunch of TJacksons on ESPN - he is decent, but he's not all that good.That said, every time Michael Irvin follows Tom Jackson in commentary, I realize how unintelligent Michael Irvin actually is.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I know of no jurisdiction where possession of drug paraphernalia is more than a petty misdemeanor. Typically it is punishable only with a fine, though in some jurisdictions it may be a jailable offense-I just don't know of any.Technically if there were sufficient residue on the item to be tested the person could be charged for being in possession of the same. In fact I believe that once or twice in the past 30 or so years I have heard of officers so charging. When they do in a one in a million scenario it gets publicized, usually as an example of our out of control drug courts. Of course no mention is made that the charge got attention precisely because it was an example of one in a million type of extreme charging, nor that the prosecutor dismissed the charge at arraingment.I would be shocked if any jurisdiction would provide a jury trial on such a petty misdemeanor. There is ample Supreme Court Authority that when life or liberty are not at stake, but only a small fine, that a jury trial is not required by the constitution. Given this, very few jurisdictions (if any) waste their resources by providing jury trials in these matters. Usually exclusive control or dominion over an item, such as having the item in your car when you are the operator and sole occupant, creates a presumption of possession. In most jurisdictions this presumption is rebuttable.The presumption of innocence is a wonderful construct and important constitutional right in criminal court proceedings. It is, however, no way for most of us to conduct our daily affairs nor to evaluate the world around us. Those who espouse this in argumentation could not possibly come close to living by this standard themselves or they would be paralyzed with indecision. Few people in constructive possession of paraphernalia through the operation of a legal presumption involving exclusive control find it necessary to make up a fantastical lie. They just say they have no idea how an item got there. In my experience a fantastical tale that does not jibe with ones everyday experience is a lie, plain and simple. When defendants lie that evidence can be used against them. Jurors or the trier of fact can make negative inferences based on that information.BTW I do not agree with our drug laws nor or "War on Drugs" Still, it's fairly clear that Irvin was caught. It's clear that he made up a story he thought would get him out from under; not because he fears the consequences of our criminal justice system, but because he fears the collateral consequences society will exact on him (i.e. the loss of his job). Even he knows that it is inappropriate for ESPN to employ a high profile doper so he is trying to dodge the consequences of his actions and is doing a poor job thereof.He should have denied generally, but not made his denial specific. My suggestion to the dopers on the board if ever they are in similar circumstances is to wonder aloud how that item got there. Say I wonder which of the guys in my car in the last several months was stupid enough to stick that in there. Say: "Please officer, take that thing away and dispose of it properly, thank God my children, nieces or nephes didn't get ahold of that." Then shut your pieholes and say no more.

 

[Marc Levin]

legalities aside (and he may be able to demand a jury trial when found with paraphernalia, even if it is a misdemeanor - you CAN be jailed for up to a year for a misdemeanor) that is not the issue here. Public opinion is - and ESPN may ditch him merely b/c he is associated with drugs. Disney likes their people squeaky clean.Realistically, he is probably going to plead this out, have 3 months of drug classes to go to, and the press will never see him inside a courtroom except to enter his plea.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

legalities aside (and he may be able to demand a jury trial when found with paraphernalia, even if it is a misdemeanor - you CAN be jailed for up to a year for a misdemeanor) that is not the issue here.

Public opinion is - and ESPN may ditch him merely b/c he is associated with drugs. Disney likes their people squeaky clean.

Realistically, he is probably going to plead this out, have 3 months of drug classes to go to, and the press will never see him inside a courtroom except to enter his plea.

18-18-428. Possession of drug paraphernalia - penalty.Statute text

(1) A person commits possession of drug paraphernalia if he possesses drug paraphernalia and knows or reasonably should know that the drug paraphernalia could be used under circumstances in violation of the laws of this state.

(2) Any person who commits possession of drug paraphernalia commits a class 2 petty offense and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars.

C.R.S. Section 18-18-428

Actually Colorado does provide for Defendants, even in petty misdemeanors, to have trial by jury if they post a jury bond. See C.R.S. 16-10-109. I had to rethink this since I've never seen it happen.

 

[Marc Levin]

legalities aside (and he may be able to demand a jury trial when found with paraphernalia, even if it is a misdemeanor - you CAN be jailed for up to a year for a misdemeanor) that is not the issue here. 

Public opinion is - and ESPN may ditch him merely b/c he is associated with drugs.  Disney likes their people squeaky clean.

Realistically, he is probably going to plead this out, have 3 months of drug classes to go to, and the press will never see him inside a courtroom except to enter his plea.

18-18-428. Possession of drug paraphernalia - penalty.Statute text

(1) A person commits possession of drug paraphernalia if he possesses drug paraphernalia and knows or reasonably should know that the drug paraphernalia could be used under circumstances in violation of the laws of this state.

(2) Any person who commits possession of drug paraphernalia commits a class 2 petty offense and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars.

C.R.S. Section 18-18-428

Actually Colorado does provide for Defendants, even in petty misdemeanors, to have trial by jury if they post a jury bond. See C.R.S. 16-10-109. I had to rethink this since I've never seen it happen.

Cause it always gets pled out - noone would be stupid enough to demand a jury trial when their best bet in challenging possession of a pipe is to attack the legality of the stop or the search that led to discovery.My point was that, legally, you can get yourself a jury trial if you want it for possession of a crack pipe. That is besides the point - the press will see Irvin once - when he enters his plea - and only if the judge allows cameras in the courtroom.

 

[Marc Levin]

legalities aside (and he may be able to demand a jury trial when found with paraphernalia, even if it is a misdemeanor - you CAN be jailed for up to a year for a misdemeanor) that is not the issue here. 

Public opinion is - and ESPN may ditch him merely b/c he is associated with drugs.  Disney likes their people squeaky clean.

Realistically, he is probably going to plead this out, have 3 months of drug classes to go to, and the press will never see him inside a courtroom except to enter his plea.

18-18-428. Possession of drug paraphernalia - penalty.Statute text

(1) A person commits possession of drug paraphernalia if he possesses drug paraphernalia and knows or reasonably should know that the drug paraphernalia could be used under circumstances in violation of the laws of this state.

(2) Any person who commits possession of drug paraphernalia commits a class 2 petty offense and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars.

C.R.S. Section 18-18-428

Actually Colorado does provide for Defendants, even in petty misdemeanors, to have trial by jury if they post a jury bond. See C.R.S. 16-10-109. I had to rethink this since I've never seen it happen.

Cause it always gets pled out - noone would be stupid enough to demand a jury trial when their best bet in challenging possession of a pipe is to attack the legality of the stop or the search that led to discovery.My point was that, legally, you can get yourself a jury trial if you want it for possession of a crack pipe. That is besides the point - the press will see Irvin once - when he enters his plea - and only if the judge allows cameras in the courtroom.

P.S. - that statute is not the end-all in Colorado - IIRC, there is another statute regarding possession of paraphernalia in a vehicle that is more than a petty mis. - plus there are local ordinances he may have violated which provide for misdemeanor, and not petty mis., charges.That said, Colorado is very permissive on marijuana possession and associated paraphernalia, but not on possession of crack paraphernalia.

 

[Shark Attack]

Irvin producing a clean urine sample would impress me no more than a pedophile pointing out that at the moment he is not violating a child.  The snapshot into their life is too temporary to extrapolate to a global set of behavior.  It's very easy if the drug of choice is cocaine to produce a clean urine sample.  If he wants to convince me he can have the below linked company do a hair and fingernail analysis and make those results public.

http://www.gdtsrv.com/testing.cfm

That test can tell if anyone has ever done a drug, no matter when it was. if he smoked a joint when he was 18 it would come up. I don't think it can tell when was the last usage of a drug, which would be key here.

What is this miracle test you speak of?

the link given will show more about that test. OK I was told wrong..my bad..seems the most they can check back and find drugs is the fingernail test 4-5 months..I had thought the hair or finder nail test could find of drug use at any time in your life..but reading the link what I was told may not be true.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

legalities aside (and he may be able to demand a jury trial when found with paraphernalia, even if it is a misdemeanor - you CAN be jailed for up to a year for a misdemeanor) that is not the issue here. 

Public opinion is - and ESPN may ditch him merely b/c he is associated with drugs.  Disney likes their people squeaky clean.

Realistically, he is probably going to plead this out, have 3 months of drug classes to go to, and the press will never see him inside a courtroom except to enter his plea.

18-18-428. Possession of drug paraphernalia - penalty.Statute text

(1) A person commits possession of drug paraphernalia if he possesses drug paraphernalia and knows or reasonably should know that the drug paraphernalia could be used under circumstances in violation of the laws of this state.

(2) Any person who commits possession of drug paraphernalia commits a class 2 petty offense and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars.

C.R.S. Section 18-18-428

Actually Colorado does provide for Defendants, even in petty misdemeanors, to have trial by jury if they post a jury bond. See C.R.S. 16-10-109. I had to rethink this since I've never seen it happen.

Cause it always gets pled out - noone would be stupid enough to demand a jury trial when their best bet in challenging possession of a pipe is to attack the legality of the stop or the search that led to discovery.My point was that, legally, you can get yourself a jury trial if you want it for possession of a crack pipe. That is besides the point - the press will see Irvin once - when he enters his plea - and only if the judge allows cameras in the courtroom.

My guess is his attorney waives arraingment, works out a plea of Nolo contendre with the prosecutor, agrees to pay the maximun fine, and tries to get quick set before a judge to enter the plea before the press gets wind of the appearance. It will be interesting to see if the prosecutor and judge allow this, or whether they want a little face time in the incident. I'll do a quick search, if I get a moment, of Texas law to determine the possible range of penalties for possession of drug parphernalia.