Mixed martial arts fighter Conor McGregor has said he had fully consensual sex with a woman who accused him of rape.
Mr McGregor told the High Court that 35-year-old Nikita Hand was "full of lies" and said bruises on her body were not caused by him.
He was giving evidence in the civil action taken by Ms Hand against him and another man, James Lawrence, alleging they raped her in a Dublin hotel in December 2018.
Both men deny her claims, saying they each had consensual sex with Ms Hand.
Conor McGregor's evidence
Mr McGregor began his evidence to the jury this afternoon, telling them he had not been in court this morning because of a stomach complaint.
He said he knew of Nikita Hand as they were from the same area of Dublin. He said she followed him on Instagram and sent him messages. Sometimes he responded, he said.
On the night of 8 December 2018, he said he had spent the day training and resting and then decided to go to an event at District 8 on Francis Street.
While there he said he was invited up on stage and took a photograph which he posted on his Instagram story.
Mr McGregor said Ms Hand responded privately to the picture - sending a picture of herself with her dress on. He said it was a friendly picture and "slightly provocative", asking where he was and letting him know where she was.
He then went on to Krystle nightclub he said, where he ordered drink for everyone that was with him and a "bit of cocaine was produced." They stayed until around 6.30am or 7am.
Mr McGregor said he and his friends got into two vehicles and ended up driving around "having a little buzz". He had requested a room to be booked for him and his security staff had booked a room in the Beacon Hotel, but he said he was not sure if he wanted to bring people back there.
When he arrived at the Goat Pub at 10.15am to meet Ms Hand and her friend Daneille Kealy he said he was of the belief that he was going to their party and had made a joke about going to a hair salon.
However he said they were outside his car in a blink. They drove around some more, he said, and he described Ms Hand as "bombastic and energetic" when they got into the car.
Mr McGregor said he had known Mr Lawrence since his teens. They had been out together earlier in the night and he decided to call to him.
He said he had "two boisterous ladies full of energy" and he needed to level it out and make it a party - "that’s what they wished for," he said.
They decided to go and check out the hotel room that was booked. He said he was being requested to "get a hotel, get drink" and he was obliging. He described the mood as "very fun, very playful, very happy, full of energy".
When they got to the penthouse, Mr McGregor said Ms Hand had dived into the bathtub fully clothed and landed with a thud, which he thought was amusing. They ordered drinks and played music.
He said he and Ms Hand where getting closer, "kissing and what not". He said he went to use the bathroom in the second bedroom and Ms Hand followed him in.
He said they began kissing "a lot more passionately" and it began to take off from there.
Mr McGregor said Ms Hand performed oral sex on him and they both began to take off their clothes. He said it progressed very quickly.
Asked exactly what happened, he said it was fully consensual and they engaged in sexual intercourse, beginning in the missionary position.
Asked to describe the missionary position for the jury, Mr Justice Owens intervened and said the jury did not look as if they had come from Mars.
Mr McGregor described the sex as "enthusiastic and athletic" and said they went through a "multitude of positions". It was "all good hearted, all happy" he said.
Mr McGregor said he woke up to Ms Hand and Mr Lawrence each holding one of his legs and giggling. He said Ms Hand then "propositioned" him again and they had sex again.
Afterwards, he said Ms Hand wanted to keep the party going but he wanted to go home. He agreed to give Ms Kealy a lift home as she lived not far from him.
As he sat in the back seat of the car he said Ms Hand was keeping the door open and was pulling his arm saying "stay, stay".
Mr McGregor said he did not see a tampon. He told Mr Farrell there was no tampon, not from what he could see and not from what he could feel.
He also said he did not see any bruises whatsoever on Ms Hand. There was "not one iota of distress" he said.
Asked how he felt when there began to be a lot of chatter on social media about a sports star, he said his initial thought was "it’s definitely not me".
When he started hearing rumours he said he was "completely shocked and frightened beyond belief".
It was the "most scary" thing he’d ever gone though in his life he said, and he wanted to make sure everything was correct, to get the best advice and jot down all his notes of everything that had happened.
His solicitor wrote to gardaí on 13 December, the court heard, asking them to go the Beacon Hotel and get CCTV footage.
Cross-examination
Under cross-examination by Senior Counsel John Gordon for Ms Hand, Mr McGregor said he had not given the guards his phone as they had not asked.
Mr Gordon said he had chosen not to make his phone available. Mr McGregor said he now had a different phone but told Mr Gordon "if you want it pal, no problem".
Mr McGregor raised his voice slightly as he said he wanted everything put before the court, including a statement by a taxi driver that she was "sucking his d*ck in the back of the car". Mr Justice Alex Owens asked him to restrain his comments.
He was asked about Ms Hand’s evidence that he put her in a head lock and that after choking her three times, Mr McGregor had said that she now knew what he felt like in the octagon when he tapped three times to stop a fight.
Mr McGregor told Mr Gordon, "your client is full of lies. Everything is a lie".
He asked how anyone could believe that he would make the comment about the octagon as he was a "prideful person" and would not highlight his shortcomings. He said it was a full lie among many lies.
"It’s almost a fantasy," he said.
He was asked about the bruising on Ms Hand’s neck and said the doctor in the Sexual Assault Treatment Unit said it was consistent with a love bite.
He said he found a recording that her boyfriend had made "fascinating" and did not hear her voice being hoarse.
Asked where he thought Ms Hand had got the bruises, he suggested, she might have hurt herself when she dived into the bath. But he said she did not get them from him.
He said the sex was athletic and physical involving a multitude of positions but at no time he said did he have anything around her neck and at no time did she bite him or did he bite her or scrape her.
Mr McGregor was asked about a second statement he made to gardaí in Dundrum in January 2019.
In the statement he said Ms Hand had "never said no or anything like that" and did not do anything to make him think she was not enjoying herself. The statement added that he was shocked by the injuries, that he did not cause them and asked if she had sex with someone else.
He was shown the photographs of Ms Hand’s injuries in court. He said he was shocked, but he said she had been out for three days at that stage from early Saturday to an ambulance on Monday morning.
Asked about a scrape on her right breast which she says was caused by her own watch when her hands were pinned against her chest by Mr McGregor, he said it was not caused by him.
He said there was no scrape, there was no distress and he was not making any one do anything against their will.
He said the evidence of a paramedic that the bruising was one of the worst cases she had seen in her career was "interesting" and he did not see it. He said the photographs were not the worst scrapes or bruises he had ever seen on a woman.
He said Ms Hand’s evidence that he had come on to her was more lies. And he again insisted there was no tampon.
He said it was broad daylight. He did not see one, did not feel one and it was never discussed.
Mr McGregor said it must have been produced after he had sex with her and he would not have proceeded if he had been told she had a tampon in or was on her period.
Evidence of Danielle Kealy
Earlier, the court heard evidence from Danielle Kealy, who was with Ms Hand in the hotel.
She said she did not know Ms Hand very well, because she worked in the Naas salon, while Ms Hand worked in Goatstown.
She said Mr McGregor's name was mentioned when Ms Hand said she was chatting to him on Instagram during their Christmas party.
Ms Kealy said he collected them from the salon on the Sunday morning and they drove around for a while and then went to the hotel.
She said they stopped at two houses and Mr Lawrence got into the car at the second house and they went to the hotel.
Ms Kealy said there were two drivers, she believed they were staying in a room directly across from them.
She said they arrived at the hotel shortly after midday and left around 6pm.
Barrister Remy Farrell asked her if she remembered Mr McGregor and Ms Hand going into another room. She said she remembered that but did not know what was happening in the room. She said they "came back out and everything was fine" .
She was asked if that happened just before they left and she said yes. "Everything was fine, I didn't know what had happened."
Ms Kealy was also asked if anyone seemed upset and she said no. She said she did not notice any bite mark on Mr McGregor's face.
She said after they all woke up they decided to leave. Ms Kealy agreed that she thought she was in the sitting room with Mr Lawrence during this time. She said she had sex with Mr Lawrence and condoms were used.
She said her phone was broken and she asked if she could go with Mr McGregor.
She said Ms Hand and Mr Lawrence were supposed to get the other car and go home. She said she said goodbye to Ms Hand and gave her a hug. She said Ms Hand wanted everyone to stay.
Ms Kealy said she got a message from Ms Hand the next day, or a few days later, but she said she had never spoken to her or seen her again since then.
Cross examined by Senior Counel John Fitzgerald for Mr Lawrence, Ms Kealy said Ms Hand was coming in and out of the bedroom she was in throughout the day and did not appear distressed.
DNA evidence
The court also heard forensic evidence from forensic scientist, Dr Charlotte Murphy who said DNA samples matching Mr McGregor’s profile were found on the body, clothes and underwear of Ms Hand.
However, Dr Murphy said the issue of whether there was consensual sexual intercourse between them was outside her remit as a scientist.
Dr Murphy said DNA profiles matching the profile of Conor McGregor were found on swabs taken from Ms Hand’s body. Profiles matching Mr McGregor’s profile were also found in analysis of semen stains on the black playsuit and underwear worn by Ms Hand.
Dr Murphy said it was 1000 million times more likely that the DNA originated from Mr McGregor rather than an unknown person. James Lawrence was excluded as a contributor to any of the DNA profiles.
Dr Murphy said both straps were ripped on the playsuit Ms Hand was wearing. She said the right strap was ripped from the front of the playsuit. She said this was recent, was not normal wear and tear in her opinion but was caused by pulling.
Under cross examination, Dr Murphy said the presence or absence of semen did not indicate consent. And it was not possible to scientifically address that.
Loss of earnings
The court also heard evidence about Ms Hand’s prospects of working again and whether she had suffered a loss of earnings as a result of the effects of the alleged assault.
John McMahon, the co-owner of the hairdressing salon in Goatstown in Dublin where Ms Hand worked, said she worked four days a week and had earned around €400 a week plus €100 a week in tips before December 2018.
He said she had returned to work after the incident in December but had struggled and eventually resigned in May 2019.
Mr McMahon said Ms Hand was good and knew she was good. She had not yet built up her own clientele he said, but he would have expected her to do that and to start earning around €750 a week.
Vocational assessor Elva Breen said after the incident Ms Hand found great difficulty in working in a customer-facing role and was struggling with significant anxiety and panic attacks.
She said when she saw her first in December 2020, she was not fit for competitive employment.
By April 2024, she said Ms Hand had made two attempts to return to work as a cleaner and as at a local salon. But in both cases, she began suffering increasing anxiety.
Ms Breen said she did not think it would be possible for Ms Hand to ever return to the kind of hairdressing work she was doing prior to December 2018.
She said she now needed a safe and predictable environment where she did not have to deal with the public on a daily basis. She said customer facing roles were too triggering for her.
She said part-time administrative work at entry level might be an option for her.
Actuary Peter Byrne gave evidence that if Ms Hand’s earnings had increased to €800 a week with €100 in tips, her loss of earnings between now and when she turned 66, based on her never being able to work again, would be almost €963,000.
He said that if Ms Hand was able to return to part-time employment in an administrative role, he estimated her future loss of earnings at almost €576,000.
He said he estimated Ms Hand’s past loss of earnings since the incident at almost €175,000.
Mr Justice Owens asked Mr Byrne to redo the calculations based on a flat weekly salary of €400 a week. He said on that basis he estimated her past loss of earnings as around €136,000 and her future loss of earnings, if she never worked again, as almost €595,000.
If she had an earning capacity of €317 per week, he said the future loss of earnings would be almost €200,000.
