Conor McGregor case: Jury considers verdict on woman’s damages claim over alleged rape

A High Court jury has resumed considering its verdict in a woman’s civil action for damages against Conor McGregor arising from his alleged rape of her in a Dublin hotel.
The eight women and four men returned to court on Friday afternoon after a short lunch break to continue their deliberations in the action by Nikita Hand against Mr McGregor seeking damages for assault arising from the alleged rape in the Beacon hotel on December 9th, 2018.
They will also decide Ms Hand’s civil claim against James Lawrence (35), of Rafter’s Road, Drimnagh, over alleged assault of her through allegedly having sex with her without her consent in the Beacon hotel.
Both men deny the claims by the hair colourist (35) and have given evidence they separately had consensual sex with Ms Hand at the hotel on December 9th, 2018.
When the jury returned today, they told the judge they wanted a means of more clearly viewing CCTV footage from the hotel on December 9th, 2018. That footage had been shown to them during the trial and was also provided to them for their deliberations.
Mr Justice Alexander Owens told them steps would be taken to facilitate their request.
The jury had begun considering its verdict at about 3pm on Thursday, after Mr Justice Owens concluded his charge to them.
The judge told the jury, when considering their verdict, to bear in mind the onus of proof is on Ms Hand, the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities and they should consider all the evidence.
If they get to the stage of considering damages, which depended on their finding that either or both men assaulted Ms Hand, they were entitled to consider rape, cover-ups or untruthful evidence as very serious, he said.
During the case, which opened on November 5th and entered its 12th day today, the jury heard Ms Hand and a work colleague Danielle Kealey were driven to the hotel with Mr McGregor and Mr Lawrence in Mr McGregor’s car, arriving at 12.30pm on December 9th. CCTV showed Mr McGregor leaving with Ms Kealey at about 6.15pm and Ms Hand leaving with Mr Lawrence at about 10.30pm.
Ms Hand and Ms Kealey gave evidence they had been partying all night from the evening of Saturday, December 8th, into the morning of December 9th and consumed alcohol and cocaine. Mr McGregor and Mr Lawrence were separately partying in Dublin nightclubs and consumed alcohol. Mr McGregor said cocaine was also available. Mr Lawrence said he has never taken cocaine.
Ms Hand in evidence claimed she was raped by Mr McGregor. She said she had no memory of having sex later with Mr Lawrence and that was a “made-up story”.
Mr McGregor denied rape and said he and Ms Hand had “fully consensual”, “vigorous”, “athletic” sex without using condoms. He was “shocked” when later shown photos of bruising on Ms Hand and said he had not caused it.
Mr Lawrence said he had consensual sex twice with Ms Hand, had seen no marks on her other than a small bruise and had not caused the bruising he was later shown in photos.
In their deliberations, the jury has to answer yes or no to separate questions concerning whether Mr McGregor assaulted Ms Hand and whether Mr Lawrence assaulted Ms Hand.
The judge has told them it is for them to decide what evidence they accept and what they reject and whether some witnesses might have an axe to grind or could have been more forthcoming. What you are concerned with here is “not just truth and lies, but credibility and reliability”, he said.
There are “silent witnesses” including CCTV which they should closely examine, he said.
Only if they find that either or both men assaulted Ms Hand will they proceed to assess damages under four categories: general damages for assault; special damages in the form of medical expenses; damages for past and future loss of earnings; and aggravated damages.
The judge has told them the purpose of damages is compensatory and damages are a matter for them.
If they concluded Ms Hand was raped by Mr McGregor, she was entitled to more than nominal damages, he said. The more seriously a person has been assaulted, the more substantial the damages.
The compensation should be appropriate to the damage inflicted and caused, the jury should act proportionately and fairly in relation to all categories of damages, he said.
If jurors get to the stage of awarding damages, they have to forget considerations such as that Mr McGregor is a wealthy man and Mr Lawrence is not, he said.