A jury in the civil trial of celebrity fighter Conor McGregor and another man, who are being sued by a woman who alleges rape, has been told by the judge that any damages awarded should be "proportionate" to harm, should they find in favour of plaintiff Nikita Hand.
At the High Court on Wednesday, Mr Justice Alex Owens said that any verdict on liability should be based on the evidence alone and that the jury "should not pluck a figure out of the sky", or consult a "Ouija board" in relation to damages.
Mr Justice Owens is giving a summary of the case and said the jury must not carry out their own investigations away from the evidence in the style of "Detective Poirot" because they could be in danger of reaching the conclusions of "Inspector Clouseau".
During the trial, Mr McGregor took the stand in his own defence, telling the jury that he had "consensual" sex with Ms Hand in a hotel penthouse, which he described as "enthusiastic, athletic, prolonged and vigorous" and carried out in a "multitude" of positions.
Ms Hand (Ní Laimhín) alleges Mr McGregor – once the highest-earning sportsperson in the world – "brutally raped and battered" her in a Dublin hotel penthouse six years ago.
Ms Hand, a former hair colourist, is seeking damages from Mr McGregor and James Lawrence, of Rafter's Road, Drimnagh, Dublin 12, arising from the events of December 9th, 2018, at the penthouse suite of the Beacon hotel in Dublin.
Mr Lawrence claims that he twice had consensual sex with Ms Hand after Mr McGregor left the hotel. Ms Hand said that Mr Lawrence’s claim of consensual sex is “lies”. Both Mr McGregor and Mr Lawrence deny the allegations.
Mr Justice Owens said that the jury was not bound by counsel's comments, nor his, in terms of evidence of which "you are the judges".
"Exercise your judgement, intelligence and knowledge of human nature. Look at all the evidence and accept and reject on the evidence, and all the evidence means 'all the evidence'", he said.
The judge said that there were "silent witnesses" in the case in terms of CCTV and telephone records that are reliable in terms of chronology.
Mr Justice Owens said "witness claims are not evidence – opinion is not evidence, it's advocacy".
The judge said that some witnesses are "notoriously inaccurate" regarding timelines in cases, "especially with a jar on them".
Mr Justice Owens told the jury to assess the "important" CCTV footage taken from the hotel for evidence of "intoxication and incapacity".
The judge said that the jury should judge whether the CCTV showed Ms Hand and Mr Lawrence flirting and insobriety in the lift while she held a bottle of spirits and a glass.
Out-of-court statement
"It was not a bottle of non-alco stuff," he said. "Evaluate if it is flirting, romance, drunkenness... what is it?"
Mr Justice Owens said the stance taken by the defence in pleading documents was to paint Ms Hand as a "gold digger and a fraud" but that this was an out-of-court statement. "This doesn't tell you anything regarding liability, you rely on the evidence," he said.
The judge said Mr McGregor's statement to gardaí was not admissible as it was a prior statement, but asked the jury to also consider if Mr McGregor "sat down to concoct a lurid and degrading pornographic fantasy" to gardaí.
The judge said people may not immediately make disclosures of rape allegations and may need "to get themselves together due to embarrassment, shame and other stresses, they might have drink on them and act in illogical ways but the law allows the evidence of the complaint of rape".
Ms Hand alleges that she was raped by Mr McGregor in the afternoon of December 9th, 2018, and alleges rape against Mr Lawrence later that night but said her first disclosure was between 11pm and midnight before she told a friend about the incident and could not recall portions of the night.
The judge said that Ms Hand admitted sending "fabrications" in the form of texts to her then partner as to her activities and whereabouts to possibly "explain away a day on the tear with Conor McGregor" but asked the jury to consider whether this came from "bad judgement or as a result of hitting the bottle".
In outlining the issue of damages, should the jury find for Ms Hand, the judge said the main purpose of damages was "compensatory" and in that case the damages would be "substantial". Ms Hand would be "entitled to more than nominal damages", he said.
The judge said rape is "very, very serious and devastating for victims and they live with that for the rest of their lives".
General damages should be "appropriate" to the wrong done to a person who had been sexually assaulted, which is an affront to bodily integrity, causing PTSD and anxiety, he said.
Mr Justice Owens said special damages for medical bills and money lost in wages could be considered in addition to the initial damages for the harmful effects of being assaulted.
The judge told the court that "aggravated damages" should also be assessed if the jury found in favour of Ms Hand.
He said elements of aggravated damages to be considered were the manner of the defendant in that if they behaved in an "arrogant manner", engaged in "outrageous behaviour", refused to apologise or engaged in an "attack on the character of the victim".
Mr Justice Owens said that any overall figure should be agreed by nine or more of the 12 jurors and be "proportionate".
"Be not too generous nor too stingy. Keep a level head," he said. "Don't pluck a figure out of the air; you wouldn't expect me to consult a Ouija board."
Mr Justice Owens began his charge to the jury of eight women and four men on Tuesday and will continue to summarise the evidence in the case on Thursday.
Mr McGregor was not present at Wednesday's sitting of the court.
