Conor McGregor proof withdrawal to be referred to prosecutors

Eire’s Courtroom of Attraction is to refer a matter in a case involving the previous combined martial arts (MMA) fighter Conor McGregor to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

The court docket is listening to an attraction by McGregor arising from a discovering within the Excessive Courtroom final yr when a girl who accused McGregor of raping her received her civil declare in opposition to him for damages.

A jury discovered McGregor sexually assaulted Nikita Hand in a Dublin hotel in December 2018.

He was ordered to pay her greater than €248,000 (£206,000) in damages and, subsequently, her authorized prices.

The Courtroom of Attraction listening to ended on Wednesday afternoon and a full resolution will probably be given at a later date. McGregor has not appeared on the attraction listening to because it started on Tuesday.

On the second day of the attraction listening to, a barrister for Nikita Hand requested the court docket to refer papers, referring to a difficulty from the opening day of the attraction, to Irish public prosecutors.

It adopted the dramatic withdrawal of proposed new evidence by McGregor firstly of the attraction on Tuesday.

The proposed new proof was from a pair, Samantha O’Reilly and her accomplice Steven Cummins, who had been former neighbours of Nikita Hand.

That they had beforehand claimed, in an affidavit, to have witnessed a row between Nikita Hand and a former accomplice within the dwelling they shared on the time.

A preliminary listening to had been informed that McGregor believed the brand new proof recommended that bruising on Nikita Hand’s physique may have been brought on by her former accomplice.

Ms Hand had described their claims as “lies” and she or he got here to court docket yesterday ready to take the witness stand to be cross-examined in regards to the matter.

Nevertheless, the listening to started with the sudden announcement that McGregor had determined to withdraw the proposed new proof.

His barrister stated a part of the explanation was as a result of different supporting proof they needed to introduce wouldn’t be admissible.

He additionally stated the authorized workforce believed there was no corroboration of Ms O’Reilly’s proof, and it was not a sustainable floor.

As the choice was being outlined by McGregor’s authorized workforce, judges on the three-member attraction panel sought additional clarification about why the choice had been taken.

One choose stated she didn’t totally perceive the explanation for the withdrawal of the proof, whereas a second choose stated “bemused” was a sort manner of describing what he was listening to in regards to the resolution.

Ms Hand’s lawyer stated on Tuesday that she was due an apology for being “put via the wringer” in regards to the proof which was being dropped.

On Wednesday, he stated the proposed new proof had been broadly circulated within the media and the allegations had been made to undermine Ms Hand’s repute.

He requested the court docket to ship papers referring to the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions and the court docket agreed.

Earlier on Wednesday, the court docket heard that James Lawrence, who alongside McGregor was accused of rape by Ms Hand, was interesting the choice to not award him prices after the jury within the civil case final yr discovered he didn’t assault her.

A barrister for Mr Lawrence informed the attraction court docket that the final precept is that “prices comply with occasions”.

He stated the occasion on this case was the discovering that Mr Lawrence didn’t assault Nikita Hand.

On the Excessive Courtroom trial in 2024, the choose stated the 2 males had been appearing in “lockstep” of their defence of the motion and it might be inappropriate to award prices to Mr Lawrence despite the fact that the jury discovered he didn’t rape Ms Hand.

On the attraction on Wednesday morning, Mr Lawrence’s barrister stated the trial choose had acted in an “incorrect method” and the jury had rejected there had been collusion.

A barrister for Ms Hand responded by declaring that the 2024 trial had been informed McGregor paid Mr Lawrence’s authorized charges, and so they had been utilizing the identical authorized groups till lately

He stated he didn’t wish to speculate on the explanation for Mr Lawrence having a distinct authorized workforce now however added it was “presumably to place an air of distance between them”.

He additionally stated any award of prices to Mr Lawrence would exceed the extent of damages awarded to Ms Hand, and would “set at nought” the award of damages to Ms Hand.

One of many three judges stated the barrister was making a “tough” argument as a result of he was asking them to take a look at “the implications” of the Excessive Courtroom case whereas their duty is to take a look at the case.