Conor McGregor has lost his appeal against a civil jury finding in favour of Nikita Hand, who sued him over alleged rape of her in a Dublin hotel.

In its judgment on Thursday afternoon, the three judge Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal “in its entirety”. Ms Hand was in court for the ruling. Mr McGregor was not present.

Mr McGregor, who denied rape and claimed he had consensual and “vigorous” sex with Ms Hand in the Beacon hotel on December 9th 2018, had claimed the trial judge erred in directing the High Court civil jury should be asked to decide whether he “assaulted”, rather than “sexually assaulted”, Ms Hand.

Dismissing that ground of appeal, Mr Justice Brian O’Moore, sitting with Ms Justice Isobel Kennedy and Mr Justice Michael McGrath, said the appeal court had no doubt the overall effect of Mr Justice Alexander Owen’s charge was to tell them the central allegation by Ms Hand against Mr McGregor was he had raped her.

It was “unreal” to suggest that, after the trial judge had framed the issue in the “brutally clear” way he had, that the jury could have been confused.

Speaking outside the Four Courts in Dublin following the judgment, Ms Hand said “today I can finally move on and try to heal”.

  • But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    Man I remember when he was super popular and i would get downvoted by all the bros for saying he was a piece of shit and a racist and so many other things

  • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    What the actual fuck kind of society let’s a proven in a court of law rapist pay a financial settlement and walk free? Oh right, I forgot, we’re all dead and in Hell. Silly fucking me.

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      In criminal court you are presumed innocent and the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that you did it

    • TheLowestStone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m not familiar with the legal system there but there’s usually a different burden of prior between criminal and civil trails. Prosecutors declined to press criminal charges so it might be that there wasn’t enough evidence to 100% conclusively prove that he did it.

    • AngryishHumanoid@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      In most jurisdictions you have 2 kinds of courts, criminal and civil. Criminal is the government accusing a person or entity of breaking a law and saying they should be punished (fines, confinement, death, etc). Civil is a person or entity accusing another person or entity of harming them in some way and saying they should be punished with a fine. Both trials can technically happen at the same time but they tend to avoid doing that for various reasons.