Damages should be appropriate if jury finds woman was assaulted, judge says – The Irish Times

A High Court judge continues to impeach the jury before sending it off to consider their verdict as a woman sues for damages over the alleged assault she was raped by Conor McGregor in a Dublin hotel.

Eight women and four men will also decide Nikita Hand’s case against James Lawrence (35), of Rafter’s Road, Drimnagh, alleging he was assaulted after having sex without consent at the Beacon hotel.

Both men deny the 35-year-old hair colorist’s claims and claim they had consensual sex with Ms Hand separately at the hotel on December 9, 2018.

The jury heard that Ms Hand and colleague Danielle Kealey, along with Mr McGregor and Mr Lawrence, were driven to the hotel in Mr McGregor’s car and brought to the hotel at 12.30am on December 9. CCTV showed Mr McGregor leaving with Ms Kealey at around 6.15pm and Ms Hand leaving with Mr Lawrence at around 10.30pm.

Ms Hand and Ms Kealey testified that they had been partying all night and consuming alcohol and cocaine from the evening of Saturday, December 8, until the morning of December 9. Mr McGregor and Mr Lawrence were partying and consuming alcohol separately in Dublin nightclubs. Mr McGregor said cocaine was also present. Mr Lawrence said he had never taken cocaine.

Ms Hand proves she was raped by Mr McGregor, who “didn’t take no for an answer”. She later said she had no memory of having sex with Mr Lawrence.

Mr McGregor denied rape and said he and Ms Hand had “completely consensual”, “vigorous”, “athletic” sex without using a condom. He later said he was shocked when Ms Hand showed him photos of the bruising and that he had not caused it. Mr Lawrence said he had sex with Ms Hand twice using a condom and that he did not see any marks on her except for a small bruise which he said she pointed out to him.

Mr Justice Alexander Owens continued his duty to the jury today.

He said they would be asked to answer yes or no to separate questions about whether Mr McGregor assaulted Ms Hand and whether Mr Lawrence assaulted Ms Hand.

If they answer yes for one or both men, they will begin assessing compensation in four categories: general damages for assault; special damages in the form of medical expenses; damages for past and future loss of earnings and aggravated damages.

He said the purpose of the award was compensatory and that compensation was a matter for the jury.

He said Ms Hand was entitled to more than nominal compensation if they concluded she had been raped by Mr McGregor. The more seriously a person is attacked, the greater the damage.

Clearly rape is a very serious matter, rape is “devastating” for victims, they have to live with it for the rest of their lives, and rape creates trenches on dignity and sanity, he said.

He added that even if it is not proven that the rape victim suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, the jury can accept that the victim will have to live with it for years to come.

He said Ms Hand was entitled to significant compensation against Mr Lawrence if they found that she had been raped by Mr Lawrence, even if she was unaware that it had occurred.

If they decide for Ms Hand against either defendant, they must consider general damages, which are compensatory damages for the harmful effect of the rape. If a decision is made against Mr McGregor it will include some amount of the PTSD levied against him.

He said aggravated damages included sums awarded on grounds including the conduct of the perpetrator, including the manner in which he conducted the case, which shocked the plaintiff. Punitive or exemplary damages are on a different level; They point out that the defendants’ conduct was “not particularly approved” by the jury. A jury may impose a sentence if, for example, it considers that witnesses conspired to make up a story, including claiming that a plaintiff was a gold digger. Punitive damages are “the exception rather than the rule.”

He said compensation should be appropriate to the damage done and caused. The jury must act proportionately and fairly in relation to all categories of damages.

He said the Judicial Council’s personal injury guidelines did not apply to acts of assault. The official added that awards are also not given in serious defamation cases.

He told the jury that if they got to the stage of awarding damages, they should forget that Mr McGregor was a rich man and Mr Lawrence was not.

If the jury found that Mr. Lawrence assaulted Ms. Hand, the judge barred the jury from awarding damages against him because of the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder that Ms. Hand suffered from.

Hand, a mother-of-one, said in her statement regarding any damages that she felt uncomfortable continuing to live in Drimnagh after the alleged attacks. He had bought a house in Drimnagh with his former partner before the alleged attacks but now lives elsewhere.

Ms Hand, who the jury heard was diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in December 2020, also said she was unable to return to work as a hair dyer due to the impact of the alleged attacks. The court heard she worked part-time as a cleaner for about ten months.

The judge, who started his duty after 16.00 on Tuesday, continued his duty today.

He told the jury Ms Hand had been drinking from December 8 to December 9 and had also used cocaine. Assuming he woke up around 7 a.m. to go to work on December 8, 2018, he was awake “at the trot for 33 hours” by early Sunday afternoon, December 9. He had been drinking alcohol between 4pm and 5pm on December 8th and had not eaten any significant food from Saturday evening until Sunday night when he ate a hamburger at the hotel. He said he still had a bottle of Bacardi and a glass in his hand, according to security footage from the hotel elevator.

Ms Kealey was out for a similar period of time and Mr McGregor and Mr Lawrence were also out partying from Saturday night into Sunday.

He said the jury could apply their common sense when examining CCTV evidence, including footage of Ms Hand and Mr Lawrence in the hotel lift “bewildered” pushing buttons on the lift in their attempt to get to the seventh floor.

The jury must look at all the evidence and decide what parts to accept and what to reject. They must consider whether a witness has a “known hatchet,” is hiding something, or is “more forthcoming.”

He said the witnesses were “mistaken” about the time, “especially with the jar on them.”

He said other “silent” witnesses, such as CCTV, could be considered more reliable. The jury has to go through this, examine who did what, whether they were drunk or in love.

He said the jury was not bound by the attorneys’ views on the evidence.

“What you’re dealing with here is credibility and trustworthiness, not just truth and lies,” he told the jury. He said that sometimes the evidence cannot be trusted because it is a lie, and sometimes the evidence cannot be trusted because some things are remembered incorrectly.

The defense claim was that Ms. Hand had to explain things to her boyfriend when he came home in the early morning hours of December 10 and made up a story about being raped, that what she said after the alleged rape was inconsistent and that her entire explanation was nonsense.

Ms Hand’s case was that she had been abused and was “in pieces” when she revealed that she had raped her manager Eimear Brennan late on the night of 9/10 December, that she was in fear and did not want to hurt her boyfriend by telling him about it. actually.

Earlier, during his sentencing on Tuesday, the judge had touched on the issue of consent to sexual activity.

He said juries should be careful in reaching conclusions about what they think a person alleging sexual assault should or should not have done. A person exposed to a stressful event such as rape may react to it in ways that may seem irrational, especially if “they are confused by the consumption of intoxicating substances,” he said.