The former UFC champion said you are “out of your f**king mind if you think I am paying James Lawrence legal costs” on social media.
On Thursday, the Court of Appeal dismissed McGregor’s challenge to the outcome of a civil rape case Nikita Hand won against him last year.
McGregor’s friend Mr Lawrence, who was also sued by Ms Hand but was found by a jury not to have raped her, also appealed against a High Court decision not to award him costs.
This was also rejected by the Court of Appeal, which cited evidence in the trial that McGregor was paying his friend’s costs.
The three judges said that if Mr Lawrence was awarded costs and repaid his friend, then Ms Hand would ultimately be making payments “to the man who raped her”, referring to McGregor. If he did not, he would be awarded a “bounty” for his troubles.
James Lawrence. Photo: Collins
On Friday, McGregor hit back at the idea that he would be paying the legal fees of Mr Lawrence.
In bizarre and lengthy post on X, the 37-year-old said: “He was awarded his clearance in a civil trial but he was not awarded his costs! How incredibly wrong!
“To be accused of rape, win your innocence, and then be hit with the colossal bill of your defense while the lawyers and accuser who done the case against you, and lost, get their money. I don’t think I have ever heard the likes of this.
“You are out of your f**king mind if you think I am paying James Lawrence legal costs, folks. Who said I was paying his fees?
“I said I didn’t know if I was, when the accuser’s barrister asked me on the stand, as I didn’t (who is paying his own fees I should have asked him at that time).”
Conor McGregor
News in 90 Seconds, Friday August 1
Ms Hand sued the MMA fighter for damages for raping her at the Beacon Hotel on December 9, 2018.
Last November, a jury of eight women and four men found that McGregor (37) civilly liable for the assault and awarded her almost €250,000 in damages.
McGregor’s online rant then went on to criticise his own legal team over the decision to withdraw two witnesses from the appeal after they came forward alleging they had new evidence from the night Ms Hand said she was raped by McGregor.
McGregor had asked the Court of Appeal to allow in new claims that Ms Hand was punched and kicked by her then partner just hours after she says she was raped by McGregor in 2018.
However, the allegations, made by Samantha O’Reilly and Steven Cummins, former neighbours of Ms Hand, were dramatically withdrawn as a ground of appeal on the morning the case opened in July.
Mark Mulholland KC, for McGregor, linked the decision to difficulty his side said they would have introducing a report from former Northern Ireland state pathologist Professor Jack Crane, which purportedly supported Ms O’Reilly’s account.
Ms Hand’s counsel John Gordon said his side was in “shock” at the late withdrawal of the fresh evidence application.
Mr Gordon then said the matter should be referred to the DPP for perjury by the witnesses, as well as subornation of perjury by McGregor.
He said the part of the appeal withdrawn by McGregor was not just an attempt to introduce further evidence, but was designed to undermine Ms Hand’s reputation.
Mr Gordon said his client had put in a sworn statement in reply, in which she had “called it out as lies”.
The three-judge court later said it intended to refer the matter to the DPP amid the allegations of perjury.
Regarding the decision to withdraw the witnesses from his appeal, McGregor said on X: “Why these two witnesses were not called, I will never know. It was on the very morning of. They were present and very eager to testify.
“It seemed they were pulled out of fear from my appointed team [to be honest]. For what I don’t know. These people said they seen something, let us all hear.
“If it’s legit, great, it sounds very legit to me. If it’s not, it’s on them.”
Nikita Hand speaks after the hearing of Conor McGregor’s failed appeal. Photo: Collins
The Court of Appeal rejected all grounds of appeal advanced by McGregor and dismissed it in its entirety.
On the argument around the issue paper, the judges said it is “simply unreal” to suggest that any juror could have been confused by the wording when the issue was “framed in a clear way” by the trial judge when he spoke of intentional and non-consensual contact. This ground of appeal was rejected.
The court also said it was satisfied that the potential prejudice to McGregor in relation to his “no comment” answers being put to the jury was not established.
“The real risk of an unfair trial has not been demonstrated” Justice Brian O’Moore said in relation to this ground of appeal as he rejected it.
Speaking outside court after the ruling, Ms Hand thanked her legal team, the rape crisis centre, and three judges of the appeal court.
‘I’m deeply grateful for everyone who supported me, believed in me and stood by my side during this long and painful journey.
“This appeal has retraumatised me over and over again.
“Being forced to relive it, what has happened has had a huge impact on me.
“For every survivor out there, I know how hard it is but please don’t be silent, you deserve to be heard, you also deserve justice.
“Today I can finally move on and try to heal. Thank you.”