Nikita Hand 'will always be a marked woman because she stood up to Conor McGregor'

She had to stop seeing a counsellor because she could no longer afford to pay for the sessions. A doctor says she suffers from PTSD, which can bring flashbacks, nightmares, uncontrollable thoughts, triggering events, and intrusive memories.

Between GPs, pharmacies and psychotherapists, she said she’s spent over €4,000 in recent years.

Her life changed because, in her words, Conor McGregor raped her in the Beacon Hotel in Sandyford on December 9, 2018.

Yesterday, Nikita Hand won her claim against him for damages in a High Court civil case, and was awarded over €248,603 in damages.

December 9, 2018, had started well for both of them. 

Ms Hand was well into her Christmas night out with colleagues when the clock struck midnight. Having drunk beer and rum and taken cocaine, she was going with the party from the Goat pub to the hair salon across the road where she worked.

Two months after his chastening loss in the octagon to Khabib Nurmagomedov, McGregor wanted to enjoy himself that weekend.

Having gone to a club night in the Tivoli Theatre, he went on to Krystle nightclub, where he stayed until the very early hours as he ordered rounds of drinks for the crew he was with and “cocaine got produced” too.

Ms Hand, who’d recently sent him the odd message on Instagram, was messaging him again that night, replying to stories.

“She sent me a picture of herself in a dress on the evening,” Mr McGregor told the judge and jury in Court 24. “It was friendly. Slightly provocative. She was asking me where I was, and letting me know what she was doing.”

Keenly aware that he might want the party go on further, he had one of his security guards book a hotel room for him. This was a normal enough thing. His security guards were on eight-hour shifts. They may have to switch over for a McGregor night out. They’d book his hotels, get him food, get him drink. Whatever he needed. The privileged lifestyle of a multi-millionaire.

He denies these hotels would be booked so he could bring women back for sex. It was more to have the option of an after party, or a place for him to relax before returning to “the normal world”.

But he would have sex at these after parties “if [he] was lucky enough”.

It was a long night, for sure, that would become a long day. Plenty of drink was taken. In the words of Mr Justice Alexander Owens, “John Jameson, Arthur Guinness, and Mr Bacardi” would be “co-conspirators” in all of this, given the drink taken.

By 7.30am, people were beginning to leave. This crew included some women who resolved to head home.

It was then that McGregor started to respond to Ms Hand’s messages on Instagram. He denied that he did so to make Nikita Hand the “replacement” for the women who had left.

“She was contacting me,” he said. “It was at that time I engaged.”

Ms Hand’s barrister, John Gordon SC described Conor McGregor, as a liar. 

“The liar here is Mr McGregor,” he said. “Who doesn’t have the courage, doesn’t have the decency to own up to what he did. What he should’ve done is if he was a man at all was to apologise to my client for what he did to her. He’s not a man, he’s a coward. A devious coward. You should treat him for what he is.”

The mood in Court 24 was frequently tense, sombre at times as harrowing testimony was being given. Ms Hand, in particular, had several tough days in the witness box. When McGregor gave evidence, you could hear a pin drop at times.

At other times, you could hear sharp intakes of breath at his description, for example, of how he told his friend James Lawrence he had “two lovely ladies” waiting for him in the car outside.

The contrast between the two accounts given by Ms Hand and McGregor was incredibly stark during the civil trial at the High Court but both agreed on a few points.

They agreed McGregor turned up being driven in a car to the hair salon in Goatstown to pick up Ms Hand and her colleague, Danielle Kealey.

They agree they drove around and went to Mr Lawrence’s home, and he joined the trio in the car. From there, they went to the Beacon Hotel in Sandyford.

Cocaine 

Ms Hand said McGregor came out of Mr Lawrence’s house with a bag of cocaine in his hand. McGregor denied this and said the cocaine was “already present”. For his part, Mr Lawrence told the court he has never done and would never do cocaine.

Regardless, both Ms Hand and McGregor agree they did cocaine in that car prior to getting to the Beacon.

When they got there, Ms Hand told the court, they were all drinking and laughing and that the mood was “fine”.

McGregor tells a similar story, and said the mood was “very fun, very playful, very happy and full of energy”. Having already been out all night, more drink was ordered to be brought to the room with the security guards delivering them.

It’s here their accounts begin to diverge sharply.

Contradictory accounts 

Ms Hand told the court that, shortly after they arrived, McGregor was on the toilet and told her to “suck on that”.

McGregor said she followed him into the bathroom and then performed oral sex on him.

He said they then proceeded to have “athletic”, “physical”, “enthusiastic” sex “in a multitude of positions”. But “not rough” sex. They fell asleep for a bit, and he said they had sex again before he decided he would leave.

Ms Hand says he “brutally raped” and battered her in that hotel room. She said he pinned her to the bed and choked her: 

I remember biting really hard and then his arms were around me and choking me. 

“I just froze and I couldn’t move or breathe and I kept looking at the bedpost and thinking of my daughter... Then he said that’s how he felt when he was in the octagon and had to tap out three times. I thought it was such a weird thing to say. I promised I wouldn’t tell anybody anything.”

By Mr McGregor’s account, Ms Hand wanted to stay on and keep the party going. But he left anyway, leaving her with Mr Lawrence. Mr Lawrence and Ms Kealey also told the court Ms Hand was keen to keep the party going.

CCTV played to the court shows them all coming up in the lift to the hotel room, and back down again. The jury were invited to make conclusions based on what they could see in that footage.

Ms Hand said she had no memory of the footage and found it hard to watch, breaking down in tears at times looking at it.

“It’s me but it’s not my character. It’s very disturbing for me,” she said.

Mr Farrell, for McGregor, put it to Ms Hand that the CCTV shows her kissing McGregor’s arm and giving him a hug. He said it also showed her that “everything in that CCTV footage contradicts the story you have told”, but she denied this.

Mr Farrell also said Mr Lawrence’s account where he claimed he had consensual sex twice with Ms Hand after McGregor left the Beacon Hotel is “fatal” to Ms Hand’s account.

Ms Hand’s legal counsel, meanwhile, said that Mr Lawrence was “telling lies”, and referenced his account of also having sex three times with Ms Kealey in the hotel room that day. She gave evidence they had sex once.

“Again, you will have your own knowledge of the world in your heads and will know what to make of that evidence,” Mr Gordon told the jury.

McGregor said on the stand that he was paying Mr Lawrence’s legal fees but denied his friend — who he bonded with as a teenager over the Call of Duty video games — was meant to be the “fall guy”.

Claims that Ms Hand had lied

McGregor's legal team, meanwhile, said that Ms Hand told lies to her boyfriend and “simply invented” an account of what happened to her that day when she later spoke to a friend.

Mr Farrell would also repeatedly reference her inability to remember other aspects of the day when he gave his closing speech to the jury.

“Is it probable or improbable that somebody remembers rape, and fails to remember all the other innocent bits and pieces around it that seem to flatly contradict it?” he said.

He pondered why she lied to her then-boyfriend on the day, and said she was worried she “had to go home and face the music”. McGregor’s defence team said that, to explain what had happened to her, she said she was raped. And that her account is “nonsense”.

On the other hand, Mr Gordon said that his client was “terrified out of her wits” after the events of December 9, 2018.

He said the medical evidence was particularly strong, including from a doctor who had to remove a tampon from high up in her vagina with forceps and an ambulance crew member who said Ms Hand had some of the worst bruising she’d ever seen. And that she had been through a traumatic event from which she was suffering PTSD.

Referencing what McGregor had to say, he urged the jury not to be “sold a pup by this arrogant man”, who had subjected them to “arrogant, distasteful, dishonest testimony”.

Mr Justice Owens, when summarising the case to the jury, told them: “It’s a question in my view of truth or lies.

One side or the other is telling lies in relation to what happened in the Beacon Hotel.

It would up to the eight women and four men of the jury to pick through it all.

The jury filed back into the room after six hours and 10 minutes of deliberations. In all cases, what happens in the jury room is sacrosanct. But in the vacuum as people await a verdict, attendees throw out of theories of how long it may take or what it might mean if they take x amount of time or y amount of time to reach a verdict.

A theory posited was that if the jury came back relatively sooner rather than later, it would be in McGregor’s favour. If they had decided he did not assault Ms Hand, then they wouldn’t have to deliberate any further.

Whereas, if they found on the balance of probabilities that Ms Hand was assaulted by McGregor (and Mr Lawrence), then they would have to decide on the level of damages she would receive.

If the mood had been tense over the two weeks of the trial to date, the silence was almost painfully audible as the courtroom waited for the jury to come down the stairs and take their seats to deliver their verdict.

Mr McGregor shook his head as the jury of eight women and four men returned with their verdict.

During his closing speech, Mr Farrell said there would be a winner in this case. And a loser. And either result would have consequences. But he urged them to ignore what those consequences would be.

“If you find for Mr McGregor, it’ll be devastating for Ms Hand,” he said, and vice versa.

He even gave a long preface acknowledging that members of the jury may not be fans of McGregor, given his persona and the fact he’s a man who “elicits strong views”.

“It may well be the case, some of you, a lot of you, most of you, all of you, may well have negative views about him before you sat on this jury,” Mr Farrell told them. “Some of you may actively dislike him. Some of you may loathe him.”

Opinions may remain entrenched as they were before this trial well after it has ended. People will have their mind made up about McGregor, good or bad.

Conor McGregor's future 

Whether now, approaching his late 30s, he continues to secure lucrative bouts in the ring or his nascent acting career carries on remains to be seen. It may well be so that the events in Court Room 24 have little effect on his ability to continuing earning vast sums of money in the MMA world in the US.

Even if he did not, he has already earned tens of millions of euro over the course of his career to date.

Nikita Hand 'lives in fear'

But then there’s also Ms Hand, and what her counsel John Gordon had to say about her in his closing speech as she wept silently in the row behind him. For her it may be quite different.

“You know she lives in fear,” he said. “She wants to get away from it. She needs to get away from it.

“There is no magic wand, [but] receiving vindication from you is of course a huge step. But it doesn’t change what happened. It doesn’t change the fact she will live with this for the rest of her days.

“She will always be a marked woman because she stood up to Conor McGregor.”