Former MMA fighter Conor McGregor loses appeal in civil rape case

Conor McGregor has lost his civil jury appeal against a finding that he sexually assaulted a woman.

In November, McGregor was ordered to pay £206,000 in damages plus costs to Nikita Hand, who accused him of raping her in a hotel in Dublin in 2018.

McGregor appealed on the grounds that his lawyers believed his answers to police during interviews should not have been put before the jury.

His barrister also argued that a question on the "issue paper" given to the jury to help them decide their verdict should have been worded differently.

Three senior judges at the Court of Appeal in Dublin dismissed the appeal on all grounds.

Conor McGregor was not in court for the ruling.

Nikita Hand attended the hearing with several supporters.

In relation to the police interviews, the court found McGregors lawyers had not proved there was "a real risk of unfair trial".

During the original case, the jury heard that McGregor said "no comment" around 100 times when he was interviewed by police.

The issue paper asked the jurors if Conor McGregor had assaulted Ms Hand.

McGregors lawyers argued it should have specified "sexual assault" rather than "assault".

But the appeal judges said that it was "simply unreal" to suggest that any member of the jury could have become confused about the meaning of the question.

They gave a unanimous ruling that McGregors appeal should be dismissed "in its entirety".

McGregors friend, James Lawrence, also lost his appeal against the decision that he should pay costs, even though the jury found he did not assault Nikita Hand.

Ms Hand had claimed in her action that Conor McGregor and James Lawrence both raped her.

The men said they both had consensual sex with her.

Speaking outside court, Ms Hand said she was grateful for the support she has received throughout the civil action.

"This appeal has retraumatised me over and over again, being forced to relive it, what happened has had a huge impact on me," she said.

Ms Hand added: "To every survivor out there, I know how hard it is, but please, dont be silenced.

"You deserve to be heard, you also deserve justice. Today, I can finally move on and try to heal."

The appeal was based around several issues arising from the civil trial at Dublins High Court last year.

They included reference to the question "did Conor McGregor assault Nikita Hand?" being asked of the jury on the issue paper.

Conor McGregors legal team said it should have specified sexual assault.

However, a barrister for Ms Hand said "assault" covers a wide variety of assaults adding "what we were dealing with was assault by rape".

He added the question put to the jury "was agreed and the jury could not have been confused by it".

McGregor was also appealing an issue around the handling of his answers in interviews with gardaí (Irish police officers).

His legal team explained that the jury heard McGregor gave about 100 "no comment" answers to gardaí.

His barrister said he had a right to silence in police interviews and it was "left hanging", allowing the jury to draw an adverse inference.

Ms Hands legal team countered this argument by saying that if this was such a serious issue for McGregor at the time "surely an application to discharge the jury would have been made".

Her barrister said such an application was not made.

McGregors legal appeal was also raising an issue about the judges charge to the jury during the civil trial.

At the beginning of the process, Irelands Court of Appeal was told that McGregor had withdrawn an application to have new evidence entered at the appeal.

The proposed evidence was from a couple, Samantha OReilly and Steven Cummins, who are former neighbours of Nikita Hand.

A previous preliminary hearing was told that they claimed to have witnessed a row between Ms Hand and her former partner Stephen Redmond in December 2018.

The court heard McGregor believed the new evidence suggested that bruising on Nikita Hands body could have been caused by her former partner.

In an affidavit, Ms Hand had described the allegations as untrue and lies.

The senior judges said it was "somewhat mysterious" that what they described as an "important and contentious" part of the appeal had been "cast aside".

They awarded Ms Hand costs in relation to this aspect of the case.