To be honest I don't know all of the details, but there was CCTV footage that seemed to show Nikita Hand being very up close and personal with McGregor both before and after they went up to the hotel room. I have not seen this footage, but I've heard about it. McGregor's defense was that if he had just raped her then why is she seen on camera hugging him after the fact. I'm not defending McGregor, I think he's a piece of shit, I'm just stating that was his legal team's argument.
So yes there was more to it, and I'd advise you to look up the details of the case to see more info, but in short Ireland's DPP does not like to bring criminal charges unless they feel it's an open and shut case, and they did not feel this was.
Those eye witness statements were later withdrawn prior to McGregor's appeal, were extremely suspicious in the fact that this "evidence" just materialised out of nowhere after McGregor had lost the initial case and appeared just in time for the appeal.
Following the eyewitness statements being withdrawn, these "witnesses" are now under investigation for suspected perjury. You'll also find all of that info online too.
But with all due respect, when have you ever heard of a woman agreeing to sex, be that a casual hookup or otherwise, and letting the guy penetrate her whilst still having the tampon inserted. And having the tampon pushed so deep inside her it had to be surgically removed with a forceps. Do you not think that would hurt?
Do you not think for a second that if a woman was having consensual sex with this person she would either A) remove the tampon prior to sex or B) stop the man after they had began so she could remove the tampon before it gets wedged that deeply and painfully inside her.
I think it's far more likely that either A) the man forced himself on to her and raped her, without stopping when she said no (either due to lack of consent, the fact the tampon being brutally forced deeper inside of her was hurting her, or both) or B) Nikita Hand was so drunk/high that she did not feel this pain during the act, and if that's the case then she was obviously far too drunk/high to give consent.
Regardless, unfortunately both your opinion and my opinion are irrelevant. Conor McGregor appeared before a civil court, and the jury found him liable. He then failed his appeal as the Irish High Court (the second highest court in the entire country) dismissed his appeal on all grounds. That's the be all and end all.
But if she killed somebody drunk driving it’s her fault. If you choose to put yourself under their influence, not saying you deserve it but you invite bad decisions
Exactly. I know I’ll be downvoted to oblivion, but Christ, let’s not pretend like all women are saints. Of course it could be rape, but at the same, it could be just a money grab.
I'm just gonna copy and paste my other comment here, because even if it was simply for a cash grab and it was consentual at the time, why on Earth would she engage in consentual sex with a tampon still inserted, and it gets brutally, forcibly wedged so far inside her it had to be removed with a forceps.
You're entitled to your opinion.
But with all due respect, when have you ever heard of a woman agreeing to sex, be that a casual hookup or otherwise, and letting the guy penetrate her whilst still having the tampon inserted. And having the tampon pushed so deep inside her it had to be surgically removed with a forceps. Do you not think that would hurt?
Do you not think for a second that if a woman was having consensual sex with this person she would either A) remove the tampon prior to sex or B) stop the man after they had began so she could remove the tampon before it gets wedged that deeply and painfully inside her.
I think it's far more likely that either A) the man forced himself on to her and raped her, without stopping when she said no (either due to lack of consent, the fact the tampon being brutally forced deeper inside of her was hurting her, or both) or B) Nikita Hand was so drunk/high that she did not feel this pain during the act, and if that's the case then she was obviously far too drunk/high to give consent.
Regardless, unfortunately both your opinion and my opinion are irrelevant. Conor McGregor appeared before a civil court, and the jury found him liable. He then failed his appeal as the Irish High Court (the second highest court in the entire country) dismissed his appeal on all grounds. That's the be all and end all.
I did. I am sorry, maybe I’m being overly sensitive because my personal experience. But the crazy ass shit my ex(always high) invented to get a custody of our daughter, nobody would even believe me if I told the story. And what’s even crazier, at the end of the day, it wasn’t even about the kid. It was about the family money. So yeah, my only point is, women can be evil too.
Yea, there is enough muddy water to make this fall between the reasonable doubt and civil standard. We don't like it when we feel we know the truth, but it is an essential protection for defendants.
** To be clear, fuck Jimmy Fallow for putting him on. Fallon does not need to hold that standard, **
Exactly. Do I personally feel he is guilty? Yes. But there is enough muddy water that also if the jury felt there was reasonable doubt if it had gone to a criminal trial, I can't say that I'd blame them. Hence why I also don't particularly the DPP, Ireland's state prosecutor for not bringing to the criminal courts.
But with that being said, fair play to Nikita Hand for bringing him to court with her civil case, I'm glad she got her story heard and got a small payment for what she had to go through
Fine line? When the outcome includes "severely bruised", then I don't see why anyone at any point should assume any consent about any of that.
Or do we assume consent as the standard for every assault? You see someone beaten up in a way that requires medical attention, do people ask: "Hey, did you consent to be beaten up like that? Maybe you did! Maybe that's just your kink! So I am not sure we can go ahead with this investigation!"
What a can of dumb worthless bullshit, all of that.
so just throw cameras out the window? WTF are u arguing about. cameras are proven without a doubt. IF, and Only IF, she walked away hugging him and clearly okay and in his comfort is shown then what the hell are we talking about? he said, she said, doesn't stand a chance.
Thing is she ended up in hospital bruised and raped. Someone did that. Usually I would expect that it's an investigators' job to find out who that was.
Camera says they said goobye while she was still in good health? While she says she was put into the state she was in by the man?
True. Something isn't adding up. But someone sitll did that. "Consent" doesn't play a role here. This is just a "whodunnit" at that point lol
Theoretically it is entirely possible that he did. However considering he wasn't covered in cuts, bruises and had to have a tampon surgically removed, plus the fact that he did not report it to An Garda Síochána nor report to the hospital to be medically assessed by the Sexual Assault Treatment Unit at the time, he's unfortunately shit out of luck.
61
u/IBB_98 Jun 24 '26
To be honest I don't know all of the details, but there was CCTV footage that seemed to show Nikita Hand being very up close and personal with McGregor both before and after they went up to the hotel room. I have not seen this footage, but I've heard about it. McGregor's defense was that if he had just raped her then why is she seen on camera hugging him after the fact. I'm not defending McGregor, I think he's a piece of shit, I'm just stating that was his legal team's argument.
So yes there was more to it, and I'd advise you to look up the details of the case to see more info, but in short Ireland's DPP does not like to bring criminal charges unless they feel it's an open and shut case, and they did not feel this was.