Debunked: Conor McGregor makes series of misleading claims in court rant

Irish Daily Mirror

a day ago

Conor McGregor has made a number of misleading claims - after losing his appeal of a civil finding that he raped Nikita Hand.
In a lengthy and rambling post on social media platform X, McGregor sensationally stated that he has no intention of paying the legal fees of James Lawrence - who the High court previously heard he referred to his solicitors and admitted paying his bills.
In his post McGregor referred to the November High Court case which he lost and the appeal case which he also lost as a 'shake down,' and insisted he didn't say he was paying Lawrence's fees.
'You are out of your f*cking mind if you think I am paying James Lawrence legal costs, folks. Who said I was paying his fees?'I said I didn't know if I was, when the accusers barrister asked me on the stand, as I didn't. (who is paying his own fees I should have asked him at that time) ???' he posted.
However in the High Court case itself McGregor was pressed by trial Judge Alexander Owens if he was paying Lawrence's fees or not.
In response to cross examination first from Ms Hand's Counsel McGregor stated that he 'possibly' paid James Lawrence legal fees and referred him to them. 'I'm not 100 per cent. I get staggering legal bills.'
The Irish Mirror's Crime Writers Michael O'Toole and Paul Healy are writing a new weekly newsletter called Crime Ireland. Click here to sign up and get it delivered to your inbox every week
Judge Owens then stated to McGregor that it was a simple question - did he pay Lawrence's bills or not. McGregor responded by saying: 'I believe I did.'
In refusing Lawrence costs at the conclusion of the High Court case in November, Judge Owens said both men were acting in "lockstep" in their defence of the action and it would be inappropriate to award costs to Mr Lawrence even though the jury found he did not rape Ms Hand.
The Court of Appeal this week refused to allow Lawrence to be paid his costs as they too found that the money would ultimately end up going to McGregor, who was paying his fees. Nikita Hand speaking to the media after attending the Court of Appeal (Image: Collins Photos)
McGregor goes on to claim in his new post that he was 'on the stand in a world of fog being accused of a crime I didn't commit, and that I was actually cleared of criminally and exonerated by every witness present, as well as believed twice over by the public prosecutor, but still up on a stand civilly, in absolute shock.'
This statement is also misleading - as McGregor was not in fact 'cleared' or 'exonerated.' Gardai did investigate the alleged rape and sent a file to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).
However the DPP decided not to take the case and therefore no criminal charges were levelled against the UFC fighter. This by itself does not mean McGregor was 'cleared' or 'exonerated' of the claims - just that he was not charged or convicted of any criminal offence.
However the finding by the civil jury in November that he was liable for assault - whereby the assault in question was the rape that occurred in the Beacon Hotel in Sandyford in 2018, means the fighter can hardly claim he was 'exonerated.' The finding of the jury has also now been upheld by the three Judges of the Court of Appeal.
McGregor goes on to make claims about why the criminal case did not go ahead - stating that there was plenty of evidence of CCTV footage which he claimed showed Ms Hand 'partying away, messaging away' and leaving and coming back to the hotel 'not a f*cking bother.Smiling, laughing, dancing, kissing, biting, play fighting. It's some watch. I was home HOURS and this is all going on,' he wrote.
All of the footage was played in full and repeatedly re shown to the jury in the civil trial - with them ultimately siding with Ms Hand who stated she was drunk and not in the right state of mind at the time of the footage. Having been shown this footage and heard arguments from both sides they nonetheless sided with her, that she had been raped in the room by McGregor.
McGregor goes on to attack Ms Hand in his post by saying: 'How people sleep at night is beyond me. I'm sure they don't. Not soundly anyway, no way. Impossible. To falsely accuse someone of rape and lose, then attempt to ignore that fact/brush it under the rug is truly heinous on another level!'
However Ms Hand did not lose her case - she in fact won it, and had it re affirmed this week by three learned Judges of the Court of Appeal. Mr McGregor can continue to claim he did not rape Ms Hand - and it is a fact that he is not convicted of the criminal offence. He has however been found to have raped Ms Hand and is liable for it, by a civil jury.
He now claims he 'welcomes' the new case taken by Ms Hand against him and the suddenly withdrawn proposed witnesses, couple Samantha O'Reilly and Stephen Cummins.
Ms Hand is suing McGregor, Ms O'Reilly and Stephen Cummins for damages for 'malicious abuse of the process of the court.'
It comes after McGregor's own Counsel announced at the opening of the appeal earlier this month that they would not be called as witnesses - after admitting that the evidence was not sustainable.
Now in his new post McGregor is trying to claim that the evidence of Ms O'Reilly and Mr Cummins ought to have been heard - despite his own legal team arguing it shouldn't.
'I believed their claim, as portions of it was verified through the response affidavit to it,' he claimed. 'Why these two witnesses were not called, i will never know. It was on the very morning of. They were present and very eager to testify,' he claimed.
'It seemed they were pulled out of fear from my appointed team tbh. For what I don't know. These people said they seen something, let us all hear. If it's legit, great, it sounds very legit to me. If it's not, it's on them.'
After the evidence was suddenly withdrawn the Judges of the Court of Appeal made the decision to refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), after reading submissions from Ms Hand's legal team about the couple.
Ms Hand's Counsel flagged concerns that potential perjury had been committed by the couple - and subornation of perjury by Conor McGregor himself for attempting to introduce the now withdrawn 'evidence.'
He now claims he is 'happy this is still ongoing' - despite now being liable for a staggering €2M legal bill he has to pay Nikita Hand - and the remainder of the €250,000 award.
Sign up to the Irish Mirror's Courts and Crime newsletter here and get breaking crime updates and news from the courts direct to your inbox.