The free speech lads only want free speech for themselves.
Snowflakes!
What more do you think there is to it? Her claim was rape. The jury believed her. Iām a bit incredulous here.
Libel - your word - means a false statement that could damage someoneās reputation. A jury found McGregor raped a woman and youāre suggesting it could be false or damage his reputation. Itās not false and what reputation?
For someone who so on the ball I find this take on things bizarre.
Please lay off calling OJ Simpson a murderer, Flatty said so.
A criminal case and civil case, and what evidence is admissible, are completely different tho.
Criminal lawyers divided on whether charges should have been brought against Conor McGregor
Award for damages against seen as low by some but indicates jury did not believe martial arts fighter
Expand
Conor McGregor with partner Dee Devlin and mother Margaret McGregor at the High Court. Photograph: Collins Courts
Sat Nov 23 2024 - 06:00
Among the interesting aspects of the civil case taken by Nikita Hand against martial arts fighter Conor McGregor was the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) not to recommend criminal charges against the global celebrity.
The decision of the jury to award damages to Hand on the basis that she was (sexually) assaulted by McGregor adds to the interest in the DPPās decision.
However, experienced lawyers say there is a very wide gulf between the standard of proof to which a case must be proven in criminal and civil trials.
The difference between beyond reasonable doubt, the threshold in criminal trials, and on the balance of probability, the standard in civil trials, means it can be argued on behalf of a defendant in criminal trials that if the jury has any doubt, they must acquit.
READ MORE
How Nikita Hand won her battle against Conor McGregor
Judge in Nikita Handās civil action against Conor McGregor delivered a masterclass in consent
Criminal lawyers divided on whether charges should have been brought against Conor McGregor
The tears came from an unexpected quarter. Conor McGregor, holding his motherās hand, gulping for air and crying
When the DPP decided in 2020 not to recommended criminal charges against McGregor, Hand was upset and sought an explanation.
In response, she was told her case had been assessed in the office and the advice sought of a senior counsel, leading to the decision that the evidence did not support a reasonable prospect of McGregor being convicted.
Pause
Unmute
Hand asked for a review, and one was carried out. The review, by the DPP, upheld the original decision, with Hand being told the case was a complex one, not least because McGregorās friend, James Lawrence, claimed he had consensual sex with her in the hours after the encounter with McGregor.
Other factors cited included alcohol and drug consumption, and CCTV footage from the hotel. Hand was assured the involvement of McGregor was not a factor in the DPPās decision.
The jury awarded general damages of ā¬60,000 and special damages of ā¬188,000 against McGregor. They made no finding against Lawrence.
Nikita Hand speaks outside court after winning her civil case against Conor McGregor
The level of damages was viewed as low by some lawyers and arguably supportive of the DPPās decision not to recommend charges.
It was obvious that the jury did not believe McGregor, said one solicitor, but there were significant conflicts in the evidence.
āThe DPP was 100 per cent right,ā this lawyer said. āThere was no way they would have won a criminal case.ā
However another source said criminal law barristers had divided on the DPPās decision, given the strong medical evidence concerning Handās injuries. This lawyer thought the level of the award was a mark in favour of the jury who, he believed, had listened carefully to the judgeās directions.
In all fairness, you āreactā the same way to everything. Judgement has nothing to do with it.
Pal, would ever stop, you havenāt a fucking clue what the difference is.
Whatās the story with this? No harm in fellas having a cut off each other. But I thought we drew a line under it last weekend in terms of this kind of shite being posted
6 Likes
Ok. So if McGregor didnāt assault her, then what happened to her and what caused the injuries as described by the medical professionals who examined her?
If McGregor didnāt assault her, then why did he feel it was necessary for his friend to fabricate a cover-up story?
Hmmmm. Iāll call bullshit on this.
1 Like
Lave him off. Thatās his level. The mods clearly have an appetite for it as do his enablers as heās always at it with multiple posters.
Using rip.ie to get personal info is a new low.
4 Likes
Consistently supporting rapists and criminals is the level of a particular poster here.
At some point you have to say thereās a particular reason for that.
That poster is a free speech absolutist.
Let the poster practice what he preaches.
I donāt actually think they did. They found it more likely than not he assaulted her. They may or may not have been correct. It has no legal standing, so calling him a rapist may well be defamatory. Did the jury explicitly find him guilty of rape, or was it assault, and if heās found guilty in a civil case, does that give people carte blanche to state it as proven fact?
These are genuine questions btw.
4 Likes
You canāt libel the dead.
Fair enough. Itās a difference of opinion at the end of the day. I commented that her testimony and the medical evidence alone seemed more than enough for the DPP to take the case and I said the jury would find in her favour. I think thatās generally been borne out.
I still think the DPPs decision was a bad one. It sets a bad precedent and shows very poor example. The DPP is supposed to decide on evidence before considering public interest. I think there is link between the two in relation to rape though. The DPP seems to be insisting on nearly impossible standards to prosecute the case. We can have all that medical evidence and she still declined to take it and essentially decided the womanās testimony was not convincing enough. What message does that send to women. I firmly think she got it wrong. The Irish times article on this shows there are different views among lawyers too, so as I said, itās a matter of opinion.
1 Like
I agree with this. A criminal trial would have been very different, I wonder would the pal have told his made up cover story if he thought he could be done for perjury?
2 Likes
Heād have done what he was paid to do
1 Like
It was rape she alleged. Very clearly. How can a finding by a jury have no legal standing? The jury decides on the facts.
Hereās the judges instructions:
āIn order to bring in a verdict in favour of Ms Hand you must be satisfied that she proved her case against that defendant,ā he said.
Her case was that he raped her.
I genuinely canāt understand what you are equivocating about.
https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2024/1119/1481854-conor-mcgregor-jury-charge/
I understand the jury had to answer two specific questions in the case:
Did McGregor assault her?
Did Lawrence assault her?
They found McGregor did. Iām no mini-Matlock but Nikita Handās case was that the assault was by means of rape.
I know itās not a criminal rape conviction but experienced legal journalists are reporting that he was found liable in this case for the rape of Nikita Hand.
Iām sure theyāre on a sure footing from a legal/defamation standpoint when using such language.
2 Likes
And you do? Stop yourself kid.