Jury begins considering verdict in woman’s civil action alleging rape by Conor McGregor

A High Court jury has begun considering its verdict on 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 began their deliberations just after 3pm 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 35-year-old hair colourist and have pleaded they separately had consensual sex with Ms Hand at the hotel on December 9th, 2018.
Mr Justice Owens began his charge to the jury late on Tuesday and continued it between 10am and 1.30pm on Wednesday when, because a juror had a medical appointment, he adjourned it to Thursday.
Having outlined the applicable law and the evidence given by the witnesses in the case, his charge concluded and he asked the jury to go out at 3pm. They are due to return to court at 4pm when, if they have not reached a verdict, they will be sent home and will continue their deliberations tomorrow.
He told them 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 either or both men assaulted Ms Hand, they were entitled to consider rape as very serious.
During the case, which opened on November 5th and entered its 11th day on Thursday, 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 about 6.15pm and Ms Hand leaving with Mr Lawrence 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 she was raped by Mr McGregor and had no memory of having sex later with Mr Lawrence.
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” such as 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 they 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.