THE JURY IN the civil case against Mixed Martial Arts fighter Conor McGregor have been sent out to begin their deliberations.
Nikita Hand (Ní Laimhín) alleges that McGregor “sexually assaulted her, and in effect, raped her” in a hotel penthouse in Dublin on 9 December 2018, and that a second defendant, James Lawrence, of Rafter’s Road, Drimnagh, “did likewise”, Mr Justice Alexander Owens told the jury on the first day of the civil trial.
The allegations in the action, which were brought against McGregor in 2021, are fully denied.
The evidence in the case concluded last week, with both sides finishing their closing arguments in court on Tuesday.
Mr Justice Owens began his charge to the jury of eight women and four men in court on Wednesday afternoon.
Today, he continued taking the jury through a summary of the evidence heard in the case.
In her evidence, Hand said that McGregor raped her in the penthouse of the Beacon Hotel on 9 December 2018.
The court heard evidence from a gynaecologist that Hand attended the Rotunda Hospital Sexual Assault Treatment Unit (SATU) on the morning of 10 December 2018, where he used a forceps to remove a tampon that was “wedged” at the top of Hand’s vagina.
The court heard that Hand made a statement to Gardaí about the alleged assault in January 2019, and that she did not make an allegation against Lawrence until after he presented to Gardaí and told them that he had had consensual sex with Hand twice in the Beacon Hotel after McGregor had left with Hand’s friend.
In his evidence, McGregor told the court that he and Hand had fully consensual sex on 9 December 2018. He told the court that she was not wearing a tampon when they were together and denied causing her bruising, telling the court that she was “full of lies”.
Lawrence told the court that he and Hand had sex twice in the penthouse bedroom. During his cross-examination, he rejected assertions that he was the “fall guy” for McGregor, saying “what man would put themselves up for the rape of a woman?”.
While summarising McGregor’s cross-examination this afternoon, Mr Justice Owens told the jury that they would “have to be very careful here” in relation to McGregor answering “no comment” to questions from Gardaí and said they could not draw any adverse inferences from it.
He said that Hand’s counsel was entitled to cross-examine McGregor about this because of his earlier answer to the court that he wanted all of the evidence put before the court.
He said they were not entitled to infer that McGregor was “hiding any guilty secret in relation to the gardaí”.
He said it is the right of every citizen not to incriminate himself or herself, and that that is why gardaí advise that anything a person says may be given in evidence when they caution them.
He said people were not obliged to justify to any court what their reasons were for exercising their right to remain silent. “A no comment answer is the same as remaining silent,” Mr Justice Owens said.
“To say nothing when you’re entitled to say nothing is no evidential value.”
Mr Justice Owens finished summarising the evidence this afternoon. “I’m now going to ask you at this particular stage to go out and deliberate in relation to matters,” he told the jury.
The judge reminded them of certain points of law, such as the onus of proof being on the plaintiff and the standard of proof required in civil cases being on the balance of probabilities.
He also reminded them of the types of damages that they are entitled to award if they find in favour of Hand, including general damages for the alleged assault itself, special damages for medical expenses, damages for past and future loss of earnings and aggravated damages.
Referring to aggravated damages, he said they are entitled to be awarded for events that shock the plaintiff.
He told them to be careful not to “double count”, to write everything down and to identify the reasoning if they decided to award aggravated damages.
He said that exemplary damages are awarded for conduct that punishes the defendant. He said that punitive damages are awarded “for something which you regard as something really serious”.
He said the jury is entitled to regard rape as really serious, as well as someone attempting to cover something up or evidence “you may regard as patently untruthful”. He said that they were all matters “for you to use your good sense”.
He said that if they decide to award special damages, they must be evidence-based and must be satisfied on the basis of probabilities.
In relation to the verdict, he told them that it doesn’t follow that if they find against one defendant, that they must find against the other, or vice versa, adding that they must look at the two different cases.
Earlier this afternoon, Mr Justice Owens told the jury that if they reach the stage of awarding damages , they must deduct 15% from their figure for loss of earnings.
He told them this was called a deduction for contingencies as we live in “an uncertain world”, and the courts say these things have to be taken into account.
The jury deliberated for less than an hour before retiring for the day. They will resume deliberations tomorrow morning.
During his charge to the jury yesterday, Mr Justice Owens told the jury that they must work with the evidence that they have heard and should not speculate. ”If you attempt an Inspector Poirot in relation to it, you’re more likely to end up as an Inspector Clouseau,” he said.
Referring to Hand’s evidence, he said that if the jury assumes she had been up since 7am on the morning of 8 December 2018 and was still awake at 3pm the following day, she had been up for 33 hours “on the trot” and had been drinking alcohol without eating any substantial food.
He said Hand drank in the salon, at her Christmas party, at The Goat Grill and then back at the salon. He said the court heard she also drank in McGregor’s car and in the Beacon Hotel.
He said the court also heard that McGregor had been drinking since the evening of 8 December 2018, and that Lawrence had also been drinking.
The judge told the jury to look at the CCTV to see what it shows them about Hand’s and Lawrence’s sobriety when McGregor and Danielle Kealey left the hotel.
He said the defence case was that CCTV footage from the Beacon Hotel of Hand is inconsistent with her allegation that she was raped. He told the jury to look at the video footage in relation to a number of aspects of the evidence.
He said it was the jury’s role as fact-finders to look at all the evidence and decide what they accept and reject.
Mr Justice Owens also told the jury that the verdict in the case must be one on which nine or more jurors are in agreement.
He likewise said that if the jury find that McGregor or Lawrence assaulted Hand, only those nine or more jurors may participate in discussions on damages.
Mr Justice Owens also instructed the jury on what damages they are entitled to award in the case if they find in favour of Hand.
He told the jury that if they conclude that Hand was assaulted by McGregor, she is entitled to more than nominal damages.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say