Conor McGregor ordered to not release CCTV from trial and to pay six figure sum
McGregor was spared the prospect of contempt of court on Thursday
A judge has ordered Conor McGregor not to release or share CCTV from his rape trial - and to pay Nikita Hand E100,000 before his appeal.
McGregor was spared the prospect of contempt of court on Thursday after High Court Judge Alexander Owens said he was wary of giving the case further publicity - but warned that the UFC star cannot be allowed to “relitigate” the case on social media.
Judge Owens ruled that McGregor is not entitled to share the CCTV footage with anyone - and said the MMA star had engaged online in "irresponsible comment” in which he “attacked” the jury and called Ms Hand a liar.
The Judge said the “facts are clear” in that Ms Hand sued Mr McGregor and the jury last November determined that he “raped her” in the Beacon Hotel in December 2018. “It follows that it isn’t open for him to make contrary claims. He doesn’t get another run of the case by throwing out material on social media,” he said.
Later in the proceedings Judge Owens granted a stay on the E248,000 sum awarded to Ms Hand - but ordered that McGregor now pays her E100,000 of that before any appeal. He also ordered that Ms Hand be paid E200,000 in costs at this juncture - with the court hearing the total costs in the high profile civil rape case amounted to E1.3M.
On Thursday Judge Owens said there was a “real danger” based off material disclosed to him by Ms Hand’s solicitor that McGregor was going to disseminate the footage - which shows Ms Hand before and after the alleged rape in the Beacon Hotel - to his Italian business associate Gabriel Ernesto Rapisarda.
Nikita Hand, who is also known as Nikita Ni Laimhin, speaking to the media outside the High Court in Dublin (Image: Brian Lawless/PA Wire)If that had happened and the footage was released by Mr Rapisarda then that would constitute a “civil contempt of court” and would be a “gross breach of Ms Hand’s right to privacy,” the Judge said.
A recent social media post by Mr Rapisarda, in which he stated the sales of McGregor’s ‘Forged Irish Stout’ would “positively explode” when the footage was released, was raised by Ms Hand’s lawyers as they asked Judge Owens to impose an injunction against the MMA fighter from sharing the CCTV.
Remy Farrell SC, defending Mr McGregor, told Judge Owens that his client had not shared the footage with Mr Rapisarda - and stated that the post was not indicating that he intended to release the footage. However Judge Owens “it’s impossible to read that other than suggestion he was privy to this and footage will be released this month.”
Ms Hand’s solicitors had also raised social media posts by McGregor’s partner Dee Devlin - which they said indicated she had been shown the footage - despite only being in court for the sentencing hearing.
Judge Owens ultimately ruled, on the basis of arguments by Mr Farrell, that it was natural that Ms Devlin may have seen the footage when McGregor was viewing it in the lead-up to the trial - as he was entitled to do. However he ruled that McGregor can no longer view the footage privately - and must hand back any copies he has of it - but if he needs to see it for the purposes of his appeal, he can do so in his solicitor’s office.
Judge Owens said in his determination, any party in litigation who "misuses CCTV” by disseminating it for something other than the proceedings is “guilty of civil contempt of court.” He further said that if McGregor lodges an appeal, it would be “crazy” if the footage had been released in the meantime and spread around the “very furthest corner of the internet, of that dark hole of the internet being used by everybody”.
“Surely you can’t complain and give out that the person on the other side is a liar and put that all around the place if in fact you want another jury to hear it, with all this swinging around the internet. That couldn’t be right,” the Judge said. The Judge said he was asking what if that was to happen and Mr McGregor gets another trial before another jury - after social media has been “fired up” by material released on it by him.
Saying it was necessary to “nip all this in the bud,” Judge Owens said he was not issuing an injunction against Mr McGregor - but was ordering him to give back any footage he now has. He said if Mr McGregor had released the footage to Mr Rapisarda, that it now be given back - and that he is to arrange for the deletion of all files and copies of the CCTV that are under his control.
Earlier Ray Boland SC for Nikita Hand had asked the court for anywhere between 20 and 50 per cent of the legal costs to now be paid. He told the court that his position was that it was “scandalised” by social media posts issued by Mr McGregor in which he labelled the court a “kangaroo court” and called Ms Hand a liar.
Judge Owens said it was a matter for him as to whether he was going to do anything about these posts by Mr McGregor - but said if he does anything it is “only going to give it more publicity.” He ultimately determined that it was a matter for Ms Hand's legal team if they wanted to take the issue of those posts further.
Mr Boland told the Judge that he had sent a letter to Mr McGregor’s legal team on January 6th about the posts which they said suggested the fighter intended to release the footage. McGregor’s side responded a day later, he said, by claiming he had not disseminated the material to anyone - but Mr Boland pointed out that “it does not say he will not in the future.”
Remy Farrell SC for Mr McGregor said in regards to an appeal he would be raising two grounds - the first being an issue over the voir dire in the civil trial regarding the “no comment” answers given by his client to gardai during questioning. In response to that Judge Owens laughed and said that Mr Farrell had “no hope” in relation to that. Mr Farrell said it was “disrespectful” of the Judge to laugh at that point.
He said his client would also be appealing over an issue about the "interpretation of the jury’s verdict" as the issue paper they had to complete did not ask them if Mr McGregor had "sexually" assaulted Ms Hand. However Judge Owens said he gave his direction in the legal argument based on a Supreme Court ruling, and expressed doubt about appealing that point.
He further stated that the jury knew what they were being asked to decide on. In his arguments against a potential injunction regarding the CCTV and on the contempt issue, Mr Farrell said it was not unlawful for a person to question the verdict of a court - but that it may be with the way you go about it.
He argued that this was a case that “took place in public, the CCTV was played on multiple occasions, was described in national media and on social media.” He said there seems to be this idea that material in a trial such as CCTV “exists in some kind of a black box,” and said that this is just “not correct.”
Mr Farrell argued that it is open to journalists and others to make applications to see exhibits in a trial. Judge Owens responded by saying this can occur - but for “proper purposes though.” “And what proper purposes do you say your client would be entitled to use it for?” he asked.
Mr Farrell responded by saying he was simply making the point that it is open to his client to seek the footage - though he was not making an application to do so at this point. The Judge told Mr Farrell that if Mr McGregor wants to appeal the decision and then a jury has to decide the case again after the footage ends up on the internet, then that was “crazy stuff.”
He said McGregor now wants to “get into the court of public opinion" and “selectively use bits and pieces of the case that suit himself such as the CCTV footage for the purpose of that. That’s what it’s all about,” he said. “The point is that you’re appealing the thing, don’t forget, and you want another jury to hear it with all this circulating in the media in relation to it,” the Judge added. Mr Farrell says he fully accepts that his client is not entitled to just disseminate material elsewhere.
“Mr McGregor did have the CCTV, he continues to have the CCTV in preparation” for the case “as he’s entitled to,” he added - telling the court that his client had the footage at home and it was “overwhelmingly likely” that his partner would have seen him watching it then. Referring to the post by Mr Rapisarda and two articles written about it, Mr Farrell said it was “hearsay” - and that his client’s position was that he did not disseminate the footage to the Italian businessman, nor did he have an alleged conversation with him about it.
However Judge Owens said his interpretation of what Mr Rapisarda had said on social media suggested he was party to the material and it was “impossible” to read it any other way. Judge says Mr Rapisarda is “in effect stating he is party” to the material. Mr Farrell says “No he’s not.” “It’s impossible to read that other than the suggestion he was privy to this and that the footage will be released this month,” Judge Owens said.
The Judge said if Mr Rapisarda were to release the CCTV it would be spread into the “very deepest corner of the internet, of that dark hole used by everybody.” Mr Farrell had argued that it was “intolerable” that the injunction matter go ahead on Thursday - but Judge Owens said he would make a decision that afternoon.
The Judge later said he was not imposing an injunction - but was making an order that McGregor give back any copies he has of the footage and to not share it with anyone. The matter was put back to the 12th of February for another hearing - and in the meantime McGregor was given one week to “get back all the stuff and enable him to set out what he has done, take it off phones, computers, whatever it’s on.”
Join the Irish Mirror’s breaking news service on WhatsApp. Click this link to receive breaking news and the latest headlines direct to your phone. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice
LUCY Fallon has revealed the name of her second child, just days after giving birth. The actress told fans the moniker tonight after sharing pictures of the newborn, as she bonded with her older br…
Read more >> : Cick here
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Beloved TV personality and singer Linda Nolan's heartbroken sister Maureen Nolan has revealed she didn't die of cancer following her death at the age of 65
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Brittany Mahomes, who welcomed daughter Golden Raye with husband Patrick Mahomes Jan. 12, revealed which name the couple almost gave their newborn baby girl.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
President-elect Donald Trump has appointed Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone as Special Ambassadors to "troubled" Hollywood.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
“Bachelor” Matt James announced that he and his season’s winner, Rachael Kirkconnell, have split after four years together.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Take a journey down lost highways and through twin peaks to all things Lynchian with this ranking of David Lynch's filmography.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
'It will again be, like The United States of America itself, The Golden Age of Hollywood,' said Trump in his announcement.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
The legal drama between Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively skyrockets with a countersuit that has fans debating the truth.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Refresh for updates… Director Ron Howard praised his fearlessness, Mulholland Drive star Lee Grant called him “a one of a kind artist,” and director James Gunn cites him as a major inspiration: David Lynch is being remembered today for the unique vision and unforgettable works of art he brought to Hollywood. Lynch’s family announced today […]
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
David Lynch's work defied categorization. We look back at the movies and TV shows that made up his illustrious career.
Read more >> : Cick here
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Twitter (X), Inc. was an American social media company based in San Francisco, California, which operated and was named for its flagship social media network prior to its rebrand as X. In addition to Twitter, the company previously operated the Vine short video app and Periscope livestreaming service
Twitter (X) is one of the most popular social media platforms, with over 619 million monthly active users worldwide. One of the most exciting features of Twitter (X) is the ability to see what topics are trending in real-time. Twitter trends are a fascinating way to stay up to date on what people are talking about on the platform, and they can also be a valuable tool for businesses and individuals to stay relevant and informed. In this article, we will discuss Twitter (X) trends, how they work, and how you can use them to your advantage.
What are Twitter (X) Worldwide Trends?
Twitter (X) Worldwide trends are a list of topics that are currently being talked about on the platform and also world. The topics on this list change in real-time and are based on the volume of tweets using a particular hashtag or keyword. Twitter (X) Worldwide trends can be localized to a Worldwide country or region or can be global, depending on the topic's popularity.
How Do Twitter (X) Worldwide Trends Work?
Twitter (X) Worldwide trends are generated by an algorithm that analyzes the volume of tweets using a particular hashtag or keyword. When the algorithm detects a sudden increase in tweets using a specific hashtag or keyword, it considers that topic to be trending.
Once a topic is identified as trending, it is added to the list of Twitter (X) Worldwide trends. The topics on this list are ranked based on their popularity, with the most popular topics appearing at the top of the list.
Twitter (X) Worldwide trends can be filtered by location or category, allowing users to see what topics are trending in their area or in a particular industry. Additionally, users can click on a trending topic to see all of the tweets using that hashtag or keyword.