Court of Appeal shouldn't have been told about McGregor's 100 'no comment' replies

Extra.ie​

2 days ago

A jury should never have heard that MMA fighter Conor McGregor answered 'no comment' more than 100 times when questioned by gardaí over his alleged rape of Nikita Hand, the Court of Appeal has been told.
In his appeal against a High Court verdict won by Ms Hand last November, McGregor's legal team argued their client had been exercising his right to silence.
Barrister Remy Farrell said High Court judge Alexander Owens had recognised this right and McGregor's right to avoid self-incrimination. He said the 'no comments' were wrongly brought into the civil trial last November by Ms Hand's legal team and Judge Owens. Nikita Hand arriving at the Court of Appeal in Dublin. Pic: Collins Courts
Mr Farrell said his side had flagged its concerns about the 'no comments' being 'manifestly prejudicial' during the High Court hearing, but Ms Hand's side simply decided to 'take a punt' and 'let it all hang out'.
He said the result was that, although they had been directed not to do so, the jury were left with evidence that could allow them to draw an inference about why McGregor was refusing to answer the Garda questions.
McGregor is attempting to overturn the verdict of the jury, which found he had assaulted Ms Hand, 36, and ordered he pay her close to €250,000 in damages. A judge then ruled he must pay her legal costs, estimated to be around €1.3million. Conor McGregor. Pic: Leah Farrell/RollingNews.ie
He wants a new hearing of the High Court case. Ms Hand was at the packed Court of Appeal yesterday to hear legal arguments, accompanied by her partner Gary Foy, her mother Deborah, a cousin and friends. Also present was gender-based violence activist Natasha O'Brien.
McGregor was not in court, although his black Rolls-Royce, with tinted windows, was seen driving past the Four Courts yesterday. A group of people, including TD Ruth Coppinger, gathered outside the court holding a banner reading, 'We stand with Nikita Hand'.
Mr Farrell said the questioning of McGregor by gardaí at Dundrum station took place in January 2019, following Ms Hand's allegation that she'd been raped in the penthouse of the Beacon Hotel the previous month. Ruth Coppinger and Natasha O'Brien. Pic: Niall Carson/PA Wire
He said McGregor had told the High Court he had given gardaí a pre-prepared statement, drawn up with the help of his solicitors. During his direct evidence, McGregor told the trial that being accused of rape was 'the most scary thing I had ever gone through'.
He said he 'wanted to get everything correct', and so immediately contacted a solicitor to get the best advice, and jotted down notes. He said he wanted to 'show everything that happened'.
Mr Farrell said this was used as a 'hook' by Ms Hand's barrister, John Gordon, to press McGregor about what he had – and had not – told gardaí. Conor McGregor's Rolls Royce in Dublin. Pic: Tom Honan
He said McGregor's comments were wrongly paraphrased by Mr Gordon to suggest he had wanted to fully cooperate with gardaí, when in fact he wanted to show everything to his solicitors.
He said Mr Gordon obtained a ruling from Judge Owens, allowing him to challenge McGregor about the truth of his comments, with regard to his subsequent policy of saying 'no comment' to Garda questioning.
After outlining the 100-plus times McGregor said 'no comment', Mr Gordon never asked McGregor about whether he had told the jury he intended to cooperate with gardaí, Mr Farrell complained. He said the judge later 'scrambled' to explain to the jury why they had heard the evidence. Conor McGregor. Pic: Collins Courts
Mr Farrell said McGregor explained to the court that he answered 'no comment' in accordance with his legal advice, as he was 'petrified'. Mr Farrell said McGregor was also challenging the use of the word 'assault' as opposed to 'sexual assault' on the issue paper given to the jury.
He said this could have left a potential for 'confusion' in the minds of some jurors as to what they were being asked to describe. Judge Isobel Kennedy noted that the High Court judge had been clear that it was 'assault by rape'.
Responding, Ms Hand's barrister, Ray Boland, said it was 'an insult to the intelligence of the jury to say they did not know what the case was about'.
He said the judge's charge and the evidence made it clear McGregor was accused of sexual assault or assault by rape, 'and the jury understood that'.
He said the issue paper had been discussed by all sides and McGregor's legal team had agreed to its contents. He added that there was 'no ambiguity whatsoever' and no confusion.
Mr Boland said that as well as the sexual assault, there was also a significant physical assault on Ms Hand, including strangulation on three occasions.
He said that if the 'no comment' evidence was such a serious issue, his lawyers should have applied to have the jury discharged at the time – but they did not.
He said McGregor had told the court he wanted 'every shred' of evidence to be heard by the gardaí, and Ms Hand's legal team were entitled to challenge him about that claim.
Further grounds of appeal raised by McGregor, including issues concerning expert witnesses and further points concerning the judge's charge to the jury, will be decided by the court on the basis of written submissions.
The Court of Appeal will today hear a challenge by McGregor's friend, James Lawrence, 35, of Rafter's Road, Drimnagh, against an order that Ms Hand does not have to pay his legal fees.
The jury dismissed a claim by Ms Hand that she had also been raped by Mr Lawrence on the same day and at the same hotel.
Ms Hand told the High Court the first she knew of Mr Lawrence having sex with her was when he told gardaí, following her allegation of rape against McGregor. The High Court has heard that Mr Lawrence's lawyers were paid for by McGregor.