Jury begins deliberations in Conor McGregor case
MMA fighter Conor McGregor and his father, Tony, outside the High Court in Dublin, where the jury has begun its deliberations in a personal injury case against him. Picture: Brian Lawless/PA
The jury has begun deliberating in the civil case taken by a woman who alleges she was raped by MMA fighter Conor McGregor.
Mr Justice Alexander Owens finished charging the jury and summarising the evidence in the case on Thursday afternoon.
“That concludes the evidence,” he said. “I’m now going to ask you to deliberate in relation to matters. I’ll go through briefly the principle of law again. The onus of proof is on the plaintiff.
“The standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities. [When] coming to conclusions, look at all the evidence.”
Nikita Hand [Ní Laimhín] alleges that Mr McGregor — once the highest-earning sportsperson in the world — “brutally raped and battered” her in a Dublin hotel penthouse six years ago. Mr McGregor says they had consensual sex that day and he did not assault her. He told the court they had “athletic”, “enthusiastic” sex in a “multitude of positions”.
Ms Hand, a hair colourist, is seeking damages from Mr McGregor and James Lawrence, of Rafter’s Road, Drimnagh, Dublin 12, arising from the events of December 9, 2018, at the penthouse suite of the Beacon hotel in Dublin.
Mr Lawrence claims that he twice had consensual sex with Ms Hand after Mr McGregor left the hotel. Ms Hand said that Mr Lawrence’s claim of consensual sex is “lies”. Both Mr McGregor and Mr Lawrence deny the allegations.
Following eight days of evidence at the High Court, which included evidence from Ms Hand, Mr Lawrence and Mr McGregor, the jury heard closing statements from all sides before receiving the judge’s charge.
In his closing argument, Remy Farrell SC, for Mr McGregor, said Ms Hand was “well able to lie” and had been “happy, happy, happy” throughout December 8 and 9, 2018, but when she had to go home to “face the music” that was when the allegations began.
Mr Farrell also acknowledged that some of the jury may “loathe” Mr McGregor, but that was irrelevant and they had to consider the case on the evidence.
On the other hand, John Gordon SC, for Ms Hand, said that Mr McGregor was a “devious coward” and “arrogant” and urged the jury not to be “sold a pup” by the MMA fighter.
“My client was beaten up, badly beaten up,” said Mr Gordon, asking the jury to use their common sense when examining the evidence.
In his jury charge, Mr Justice Owens stressed that the jury could not engage in speculation and must make their decision based on the evidence.
“You shouldn’t speculate,” the judge told the eight women and four men. “If you did, you wouldn’t be an Inspector Poirot but an Inspector Clouseau.”
Mr Justice Owens said on Thursday that they couldn’t draw an adverse inference from Mr McGregor responding “no comment” when posed questions in garda interviews a month after events in the Beacon Hotel.
“You have to be very careful here,” he told the jury. “It’s the right of every citizen not to incriminate his/herself. That protection is given to all of us, the right to remain silent. [A person is] not obliged to justify to any court or jury the reasons for exercising this right.”
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
