Jay Mariotti’s Attorney Speaks; Sounds Like This One Could Go the Distance

1-liner, All, Courts, Legal, ESPN, Media Gossip/Musings Jason McIntyre September 14th. 2010, 9:45am

Jay Mariotti: Hours after the ESPN talking head was charged with seven misdemeanors stemming from his August arrest, Jay Mariotti’s attorney told the LA Times: “The allegations are inaccurate and sensationalized. We are confident that the facts will show that the complainant was extremely intoxicated that night and abusive toward Mr. Mariotti.” Horrible move. The first words out of Mariotti’s camp are that the female was “extremely intoxicated … and abusive?” Guess this means the two broke up, which is bad news for Mariotti because it means she’ll probably cooperate with authorities. [LA Times]

aroundtheweb

60 Responses to “Jay Mariotti’s Attorney Speaks; Sounds Like This One Could Go the Distance”

1
KC Resident Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 9:48 AM
Mariotti just wasn’t poised enough.
2
BFFredo Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 9:52 AM
The first words out of Mariotti’s camp are that the female was “extremely intoxicated … and abusive?”
They could have just said “She was sleeping with Jay Mariotti” and have it mean the same thing!
3
irishmafia Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 9:54 AM
ESPN is really pushing the AOL reporter Jay Mariotti. i always associated him with ESPN, not AOL.
4
Geeezeus Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 9:54 AM
extremely intoxicated … and abusive
She was asking for it!
5
die_eagles_die Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 9:55 AM
Where’s the post about the Jets sucking?
6
Let it Bl33d! Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 9:57 AM
Horrible move.
right out of the legal defense playbook
7
cracker jack Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 9:57 AM
We are confident that the facts will show that the complainant was extremely intoxicated that night and abusive toward Mr. Mariotti.”
This is really ballsy when there was an eye witness
8
yorwifesahor Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:00 AM
yorgirlfriendsabatshitcrazyhor
9
NDub Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:02 AM
Every Mariotti post needs to be accompanied by that picture of him with the shaved head poorly covered by a hairpiece.
10
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:03 AM
yorgirlfriendsabatshitcrazyhor
get a new joke or stop commenting, dude.
11
SouvenirCity Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:04 AM
He should hire Rick Pitino’s lawyer and refer Karen Sypher’s lawyer to this woman of his.
12
Cowboy Mike's Red Hot Ricochet Barbecue Sauce Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:04 AM
County dropped their charges and there wasn’t enough for felonies. I doubt he gets a single conviction. Still a shithead before this though.
13
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:04 AM
means she’ll probably cooperate with authorities.
she may still take a buyoff from Mariotti.
14
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:05 AM
Horrible move
It’s the only move
/not that I would know anything about this
15
Cowboy Mike's Red Hot Ricochet Barbecue Sauce Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:05 AM
He should hire Rick Pitino’s lawyer and refer Karen Sypher’s lawyer to this woman of his.
Personally I was assuming it was Karen Sypher here too.
16
KC Resident Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:05 AM
County dropped their charges and there wasn’t enough for felonies. I doubt he gets a single conviction. Still a shithead before this though.
LA’s cop and court system are a bunch of pussies. I agree, he’ll walk. Maybe some sort of probation.
17
yorwifesahor Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:06 AM
get a new joke or stop commenting, dude.
aye aye Captain…….
18
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:08 AM
Personally I was assuming it was Karen Sypher here too.
if it was, he wouldn’t have just caught her flirting with some other dude. I dont’ think that chick can be left alone for more than 5 or 6 minutes without needing to put a dick in her mouth.
19
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:09 AM
Gas, I gotta another rule in the NFL that outrages me more than the holding to end the game rule. The fumble out of the endzone and subsequent touchback. Terrible rule. Defense gets the ball why exactly? They didn’t recover it! And why is the ball going through the endzone treated differently than when it goes out of bounds?
20
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:10 AM
The fumble out of the endzone and subsequent touchback.
what do you want to happen? If you think the offensive team should keep the ball, where should it be spotted?
21
Cowboy Mike's Red Hot Ricochet Barbecue Sauce Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:10 AM
I dont’ think that chick can be left alone for more than 5 or 6 minutes without needing to put a dick in her mouth.
Problem being?
22
Cowboy Mike's Red Hot Ricochet Barbecue Sauce Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:11 AM
what do you want to happen? If you think the offensive team should keep the ball, where should it be spotted?
I think it would be more exciting to still give it to the defense but they have to start from the one yard line.
23
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:12 AM
I gotta another rule in the NFL that outrages me more than the holding to end the game rule
if you feel like it, go over your opinion on this one, too, for everybody that didn’t read it. It was laughable, and probably even moreso in the stark light of day.
24
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:13 AM
what do you want to happen? If you think the offensive team should keep the ball, where should it be spotted?
I can make a much better argument that the defense did nothing really to earn the ball than I can the other way around. Seems extremely arbitrary to me. I threw this around the ole’ office yesterday and was finding much more agreement than I expected.
25
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:13 AM
Problem being?
the only problem is if she’s YOUR girlfriend, and the dick in her mouth isn’t yours.
26
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:14 AM
I can make a much better argument that the defense did nothing really to earn the ball than I can the other way around.
you have to tell me where the ball gets spotted, and why.
27
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:14 AM
I think it would be more exciting to still give it to the defense but they have to start from the one yard line.
I like that plenty, but I think the 5, to be reasonable.
28
roastbeast Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:15 AM
yorgirlfriendsabatshitcrazyhor
impressive. don’t let dirt get ya down. he’s an idiot to everyone
29
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:16 AM
you have to tell me where the ball gets spotted, and why.
I have no idea, but you have to tell me how spotting it at the 20 for the defense is anything other than completely arbitrary. (for a team that didn’t even recover the ball).
30
Cowboy Mike's Red Hot Ricochet Barbecue Sauce Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:16 AM
I like that plenty, but I think the 5, to be reasonable.
Or location of where the fumble happened, which would probably be close to that, that would kind of make sense from a justifying the spot perspective.
I think the first time I saw this call made, and may have been the first time after it was implemented, was when the Panthers played I think Tampa and the players were so fucking confused about what was going on.
31
Benjamin Franklin Rodriguez is the greatest baseball player of all time! Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:17 AM
I can make a much better argument that the defense did nothing really to earn the ball than I can the other way around.
Really? go on.
32
mmonast Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:18 AM
ESPN is really pushing the AOL reporter Jay Mariotti. i always associated him with ESPN, not AOL
i was thinking the same when i saw it on the bottom line this morning
33
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:18 AM
but you have to tell me how spotting it at the 20 for the defense is anything other than completely arbitrary.
a live ball goes out of the back of the end zone, there’s consequences. It’s either a safety or a touchback. It can’t just be given back to the offense at the spot of the fumble.
34
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:20 AM
Really? go on.
Darrell, make him tell you about how offensive holding on the last play of the game should earn the offending team another play. That one’s rich.
35
yorwifesahor Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:21 AM
impressive. don’t let dirt get ya down. he’s an idiot to everyone
he reminds me of that P.E. teacher who would watch us shower to
make sure we did it propery. he’s a head football coach somewhere
36
Benjamin Franklin Rodriguez is the greatest baseball player of all time! Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:21 AM
Darrell, make him tell you about how offensive holding on the last play of the game should earn the offending team another play. That one’s rich.
A penalty that rewards the offending team? Really?
37
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:21 AM
Really? go on.
When you fumble the ball, it’s up for grabs and both sides have an opportunity to recover it (whether the fumble is forced or unforced). If the defense gets it the ball, they get it where they recover it. When the offense does, they get it back. I just don’t think a defensive team, who allowed a team to move the ball all the way down inside their 10 yard line, should be rewarded for not recovering the football
When a receiver and defensive player both catch a football, they say tie goes to the offensive player – why not say the same thing when neither secures the football off of a fumble?
38
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:22 AM
A penalty that rewards the offending team? Really?
Umm, it wouldn’t. The touchdown is wiped off the boards and they lose 10 yards. Some reward.
39
ButtersBC Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Umm, it wouldn’t. The touchdown is wiped off the boards and they lose 10 yards. Some reward.
And there’s no more time left on the clock…where’s the logic in awarding another play?
40
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:27 AM
why not say the same thing when neither secures the football off of a fumble?
and the offensive team’s next play is from inside the opponent’s end zone?
41
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:29 AM
And there’s no more time left on the clock…where’s the logic in awarding another play?
we went over this ad nauseum the other night (I was killed for it haha. I tried to argue that there’s untimed downs in the NFL and that the penalty structure provides a tradeoff – you accept a penalty and the there’s a yardage/down consequence – a tradeoff that seems pretty unequal on the last play of f game.
42
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:30 AM
Clay, what do you mean? I’m not saying I know a definitive place where the ball would be placed, but anything I come up with seems less arbitrary than giving the non-recovering defense the ball and at the 20.
43
Benjamin Franklin Rodriguez is the greatest baseball player of all time! Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:31 AM
Umm, it wouldn’t. The touchdown is wiped off the boards and they lose 10 yards. Some reward.
So, you give them an opportunity to throw another TD?
44
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:33 AM
Benjamin, that’s what we do any other time during the game.
45
Benjamin Franklin Rodriguez is the greatest baseball player of all time! Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:34 AM
I just don’t think a defensive team, who allowed a team to move the ball all the way down inside their 10 yard line, should be rewarded for not recovering the football
So, this doesn’t take into account the defensive team who has to defend inside their 10 because their offense or special teams fumbled down there? Are there a different set of rules under this circumstance since the defense didn’t actually allow them down there?
46
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:36 AM
Ben, that’s true, but I still can’t reconcile just giving their team the ball, especially when we say “tie goes to the offense”
47
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:38 AM
Clay, what do you mean? I’m not saying I know a definitive place where the ball would be placed, but anything I come up with seems less arbitrary than giving the non-recovering defense the ball and at the 20.
you aren’t worth talking to about things like this because you don’t think your positions through before you take them, and you refuse to admit you are wrong even in the face of mountains of evidence contrary to your position.
48
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:39 AM
and you refuse to admit you are wrong even in the face of mountains of evidence contrary to your position.
Not black and white brotha. And you said you were done with me, you’re clearly not.
49
Benjamin Franklin Rodriguez is the greatest baseball player of all time! Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:39 AM
Benjamin, that’s what we do any other time during the game.
The reason the 10 second run off was implemented in the first place was to not allow the losing squad, with no more timeouts, the chance to deliberately extend the game by jumping offsides on purpose or holding when your play doesn’t have a chance to work.
50
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:41 AM
The reason the 10 second run off was implemented in the first place was to not allow the losing squad, with no more timeouts, the chance to deliberately extend the game by jumping offsides on purpose or holding when your play doesn’t have a chance to work.
Clay, you read that, someone on your side bringing up the 10 second run off (I was crucified for this the other night).
Yes Ben, you’re correct about that. And like I said the other night, in instances such as these, there was no deliberate penalty to stop the clock (although you could certainly argue it was a deliberate move to keep the QB safe, thus extending the game).
51
slim02 Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:42 AM
Mariotti’s attorney is the former U.S. Attorney for Los Angeles. She defends major corporations or performs internal investigations on behalf of corporations trying to whitewash any problems by blaming a few individuals.
It’s weird she took on Mariotti for a simple domestic violence charge.
52
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:42 AM
I think a good TBl post would be NFL/College rules we’d like to change. I love debating this stuff and could do it all day and night. The sports are far from perfect.
53
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:45 AM
cursed –
your position is indefensible
your rationale is not well thought through
your ability to admit when you are wrong is nonexistent
your grasp of what happens on a play when holding is called is utterly incomplete
I am through with you.
54
Benjamin Franklin Rodriguez is the greatest baseball player of all time! Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:46 AM
Yes Ben, you’re correct about that. And like I said the other night, in instances such as these, there was no deliberate penalty to stop the clock (although you could certainly argue it was a deliberate move to keep the QB safe, thus extending the game).
(1)The penalty was most definitely deliberate. (2) In real life thinking, I don’t think the refs under those circumstances are looking at whether or not the penalty was deliberate as much as they’re looking at what effect it had on the play. In that situation, it had a significant enough effect to throw the flag.
55
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:49 AM
cursed –
your position is indefensible
your rationale is not well thought through
your ability to admit when you are wrong is nonexistent
Ha, sweet dude. I have no problem admitting I’m wrong, I do so on an hourly basis (I’m the guy who was screaming Ryan Leaf over Manning). What you don’t seem to get is that there’s no such thing as right or wrong when I’m saying an NFL rule should be changed. It’s an opinion. If you don’t get that (and you clearly don’t) then that’s your problem. If I think touchdowns should be worth 6 points in stead of 5, then it’s not a right/wrong issue, it’s a philosophical one.
I am through with you.
You most certainly are not.
56
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:50 AM
And i of course mean 5 points instead of 6.
57
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 10:55 AM
I am through with you.
You most certainly are not.
oh, i’ll keep calling you a pompous douchebag whenever you pop up and act like a pompous douchebag, but I’m through trying to help you understand the rules of football.
58
payaso Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 11:00 AM
Dirt, you have anger issues.
59
Gaseous Clay Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 11:02 AM
Dirt, you have anger issues.
are you just noticing?
60
cursedcleveland.com Says:
September 14th, 2010 at 11:15 AM
your ability to admit when you are wrong is nonexistent
I was wrong three times this week against the spread.
/wow did I kick fucking ass and win going away. 13-3 ATS.