Judge: McGregor case jury can consider if he ‘concocted pornographic fantasy’

The jury in a civil case against Conor McGregor can consider whether the Irish mixed martial arts fighter “concocted a lurid and degrading pornographic fantasy” about a woman who has accused him of raping her in a hotel.

Mr Justice Alexander Owens told the jury on Wednesday that if they conclude that Mr McGregor did assault Ms Hand and are assessing damages in the case, they can consider that in assessing aggravated damages.

Mr McGregor is facing an accusation in the civil action that he “brutally raped and battered” Nikita Hand at a hotel in south Dublin in December 2018.

The Irish sports star previously told the court he had consensual sex with Ms Hand in a penthouse at the Beacon Hotel.

Ms Hand, who is also known as Nikita Ni Laimhin, is also suing another man, James Lawrence, for assault.

Continuing his charge to the jury of four men and eight women, Justice Owens said the statement McGregor made to police following the alleged incident is not admissible as it was a statement made outside court.

However, they can consider whether he “concocted” a story involving Ms Hand.

Justice Owens also told the jury they cannot speculate and must consider all the evidence.

He told them that they cannot speculate about what a witness might say if they were more forthcoming while giving evidence in court.

He said a more reliable witness is the silent witness, which refers to CCTV footage and phone records.

He said that the “silent witness” has no “axe to grind” and will be considered more reliable.

Justice Owens urged the jury to look at the CCTV carefully, adding that they are not bound by the views of the counsel in relation to what they saw in the footage.

He also warned the jury that witnesses are “notoriously inaccurate” when speaking about timings, especially those who have been drinking alcohol.

He said it can be useless to ask a person their view of times as you will only get “guestimates”.

He further referred to evidence from Mr Lawrence, who claimed he had sex with Ms Hand’s friend, Danielle Kealy, three times in a short time period before they left the hotel.

The jury was also told Ms Hand’s evidence is that she texted her former boyfriend when she woke up in the hotel room shortly after 6pm, but that CCTV footage shows her in the hotel car park when she sent the text.

“Was this a lie or something that she was confused about?” Mr Owens put to the jury.

He also asked them to consider what they could see of Ms Hand and Mr Lawrence in the lift when they were attempting to return to the hotel room, as well as footage showing the pair leaving the hotel shortly after 10.30pm.

He said that they should view the CCTV footage and assess the condition of Ms Hand and Mr Lawrence in the lift, how long it took them to realise that pushing buttons would only get them to the second floor.

He said to use the footage to assess the condition of the pair and bring all the evidence together and make a provisional conclusion based on that evidence.

Turning to damages, Justice Owens urged the jury to “stay away” from what is stated in the pleadings, including references to Ms Hand being a “fraud” and a “gold digger”.

He said that the jury will be asked separate questions on whether Mr McGregor assaulted Ms Hand and whether Mr Lawrence assaulted Ms Hand.

He said the verdict of the jury must be one on which nine or more jurors agree.

If the answer is yes to either question, the jurors who answered yes will then go on to assess damages under four categories.

These include general damages for assault, special damages for medical damages and loss of wages, damages for loss of future earnings and aggravated damages.

He said that if someone is raped, they are entitled to substantial damages to reflect the wrong and anxiety that person has suffered.

Justice Owens said that rape affects a person’s dignity and self-worth, which will continue until their death.

He said that rape affects a person’s mental health and reputation, adding that the longer a matter is dragged out, the more serious the damage is in relation to it.

He went on to say that if they find in favour of Ms Hand, to award her damages to vindicate a wrong, and the longer a matter was dragged out without vindication the more should be awarded.

The jury was told that aggravated damages are a type of compensatory damage, and can include the behaviour and conduct of the wrongdoer, including refusing to apologise to the alleged victim, as well as the stigma suffered by the plaintiff.

He went on to say that punitive damages are to ensure that a defendant can be publicly seen to be punished for what they did.

He said that the jurors can award these types of damages on top of general damages for rape, particularly if they have found that Mr McGregor and Mr Lawrence got together and concocted their story and attacked Ms Hand’s character.

He also urged them to ensure that they must have a good reason for each damage awarded, and to find some basis for the reward.

The jurors were also told to disregard whether they think Mr McGregor is a wealthy man and can pay an award, and that Mr Lawrence may be a poor man and cannot afford to pay an award.

He also urged the jury to act “proportionately”, and to maintain a sense of fairness and not to go overboard.