Conor McGregor claims Nikita Hand's bruising may have been caused by alleged row with partner

Irish Times

02-05-2025

Conor McGregor
claims he has new evidence that bruising on the body of
Nikita Hand
, which she alleges he caused when raping her in a
Dublin
hotel, may have been caused following an alleged row between Ms Hand and her then partner hours later.
Ms Hand has sworn an affidavit describing the new material as 'lies', her counsel Ray Boland told the
Court of Appeal
on Friday.
Mr McGregor wants to have the new material admitted for his appeal against a
High Court
civil jury finding last November
in favour of Ms Hand
, who alleged he raped her in the Beacon Hotel in Sandyford on December 9th, 2018. The jury
awarded her almost €250,000 damages
.
At the Court of Appeal on Friday, Mr Justice Seamus Noonan said the court would decide, during a full hearing of Mr McGregor's appeal on July 1st, whether the new evidence, in the form of affidavits from a man and woman who lived across from Ms Hand's home in 2018, is admissible.
READ MORE
The Mixed Martial Arts fighter denies he assaulted Ms Hand. He claims the new material came into his possession after the High Court case and provides a 'plausible' explanation for bruising on Ms Hand's body.
During a case management hearing on Friday, Mr Justice Noonan said he believed a three-judge court should decide, as part of the full appeal hearing rather than a separate pre-appeal application, whether the material is admissible.
The judge said it seemed that extensive bruising seen on Ms Hand's body when she was examined by a doctor in the Rotunda hospital the day after her encounter with Mr McGregor in the hotel was a significant feature of the evidence in the High Court case. Gardaí had also taken extensive photos of Ms Hand on Tuesday, December 11th, 2018.
Ms Hand alleged the bruising was inflicted by Mr McGregor, which he denied. A feature of the case was that Mr McGregor had not been in a position to offer any plausible alternative explanation for the bruising, the judge said.
The judge said his understanding was the new evidence was from a couple – Samantha O'Reilly and Steven Cummins – who lived across the road from Ms Hand in December 2018. Ms O'Reilly had alleged that, on the night of December 9th/10th, 2018, she had observed from the upstairs window of her house a row between Ms Hand and her then partner, Stephen Redmond.
Nikita Hand speaking to media after she won her case against Conor McGregor. Photograph: Alan Betson
Ms O'Reilly had said she inferred, from movements of Ms Hand's body, Mr Redmond had assaulted her on the ground and this explained the bruising on her body seen the next day.
Ms Hand vigorously disputed all of this, raising issues about credibility and the fact the couple did not come forward previously, the judge said. The defence had offered an explanation for that. Ms O'Reilly had said she had sent an Instagram message to Mr McGregor as a result of publicity around the trial, he said.
The evidence which the defence sought to call was clearly relevant and the court will have to determine its admissibility and credibility, which would involve assessing all the evidence in the case, the judge said.
Because the issue of the admissibility of the new evidence might substantially decide the appeal and whether there should be a retrial, the motion to admit it should be heard as part of the full appeal, he directed.
Mr McGregor's grounds of appeal are wide-ranging, including claims over the conduct of the 12-day High Court hearing by Mr Justice Alexander Owens. Some grounds focus on whether the trial judge erred in directing that the jury be asked to answer whether or not Mr McGregor 'assaulted' Ms Hand, rather than whether or not he had 'sexually assaulted' her.
During the hearing last November, Ms Hand, a 36-year-old mother of one, said in evidence she had told Mr McGregor she did not want to have intercourse with him, she felt uncomfortable, but he 'would not take no for an answer'. She was wearing a tampon at the time and would not have sex during her period, she said.
[
Nikita Hand's case against Conor McGregor challenges the myth of the 'perfect victim'
Opens in new window
]
Mr McGregor denied rape and said he and Ms Hand had 'fully consensual', 'vigorous', 'athletic' sex. He said he was shocked when later shown photos of bruising on Ms Hand, he had not caused the bruises and there was no tampon.
When charging the jury, Mr Justice Owens told them if a person proves they were subject by another person to non-consensual sexual activity, that is the tort [a civil wrong causing harm or loss leading to legal liability] of assault.
The jury found James Lawrence (35), of Rafter's Road, Drimnagh, had not assaulted Ms Hand through allegedly having sex with her without her consent in the Beacon hotel.
Mr Lawrence said in his evidence they had consensual sex twice. Ms Hand said she had no memory of that and described it as 'a made-up story'.
During cross-examination, Mr Lawrence, whose legal fees the jury heard were being paid by Mr McGregor, denied he was a 'fall-guy' in relation to the allegation Mr McGregor had raped Ms Hand.
Mr Lawrence's appeal against the trial judge's refusal to order Ms Hand to pay his legal costs of the trial will be heard alongside Mr McGregor's appeal.
How Nikita Hand won her battle against Conor McGregor
Listen |
38:19