• We are requiring that all users add Two-Step Verification (2FA) to their accounts, as found here: https://forums.sherdog.com/account/security Within one week, we will automatically set this up, so please make the necessary arrangements. Reach out to an admin if you encounter issues, and we apologize for any inconvenience.

News Conor McGregor found civilly liable for 2018 sexual assault

Quick question...

Is this a witch hunt? ( Sherdog Wise )

Like when for several years everyone sh*t on him for having a kid... that come to find out wasn't even his kid.

You know. Everyone on here is 100% convinced after a civil hearing , because they were there and after he was done with her he also showed them a proper time.

I mean..

No, they allegedly weren't confident of a conviction.

Or is this just a reason to finally get away with Fighter Bashing.
A little of option A and option B I reckon -- Conor is a very polarizing figure so this story will yield a lot takes such as the ones in this thread.
 
"
Ms Hand, a mother-of-one, told the court how McGregor had pinned her to a bed before assaulting her.

She was left with extensive bruises and abrasions over her body, including on her hands and wrists.

There was a bloodied scratch on her breast and tenderness on her neck after she said she was placed in a "chokehold" by McGregor.

He denied causing the bruising, saying it could have happened after she "swan dived" into the bath in the hotel room.

Ms Hand was taken in an ambulance to the Rotunda Hospital in Dublin the next day where she was assessed in the sexual assault treatment unit.

A paramedic who examined Ms Hand told the court that she had not seen "someone so bruised" in a long time."

I usually am too logical for my own good and try and see all sides, but from all I have read I think he def deserves to lose this civil suit. There may not have been enough evidence to get a criminal conviction, but I feel there was more than enough to say there was something not right with what happenned.
 
I usually am too logical for my own good and try and see all sides, but from all I have read I think he def deserves to lose this civil suit. There may not have been enough evidence to get a criminal conviction, but I feel there was more than enough to say there was something not right with what happenned.

I mean what the paramedic said and then the doctor....
Plus Conor admitted to have sex with her, well he had no choice since they found his DNA...
Imo he raped her.. and had he not been famous and connected he would have been in a criminal court and probably lost.

I like how all UK based papers call it rape.
But the American ones are afraid to do so.
 
A little of option A and option B I reckon -- Conor is a very polarizing figure so this story will yield a lot takes such as the ones in this thread.
Some are calling this case open and shut... He'd be locked up if this would have been taken to criminal court...

Shouldn't she have gotten more than a quarter million dollars? Not even a Raquel Pennington payday.
 
I mean what the paramedic said and then the doctor....
Plus Conor admitted to have sex with her, well he had no choice since they found his DNA...
Imo he raped her.. and had he not been famous and connected he would have been in a criminal court and probably lost.

I like how all UK based papers call it rape.
But the American ones are afraid to do so.
I am fairly certain at this point he is not an innocent bystandered in this. Not sure the rules on calling it like it is so don't want to get into trouble but you get my gist
 
Is there some article detailing all the evidence from both sides? I'd rather not form an opinion without that information.

I think the linked article gives the basics, although I'd be curious to know how the cross-examination went down in court:

The next morning she had to have a tampon removed by a doctor in hospital using a forceps.

The doctor described her as having a multitude of injuries which he categorised as "moderate to severe".

Both men accused Ms Hand of lying.

Mr McGregor said Ms Hand was "full of lies".

He said he had consensual sex with her which he described as athletic and vigorous. He said there was no tampon and the bruising on her body did not come from him.
 
Some are calling this case open and shut... He'd be locked up if this would have been taken to criminal court...

Shouldn't she have gotten more than a quarter million dollars? Not even a Raquel Pennington payday.
The problem is criminal is alot more strict, though with what has come out with this case I feel they had more than enough to atleast take it to trial.
 
The real news would be if Chandler gets in on the civil case... 'conor violated me too... I waited 3 years...'
 
I am fairly certain at this point he is not an innocent bystandered in this. Not sure the rules on calling it like it is so don't want to get into trouble but you get my gist

For fuke sake
DNA inside her...
and you are fairly certain he was more than a bystander?

No shit Sherlock.
 
For fuke sake
DNA inside her...
and you are fairly certain he was more than a bystander?

No shit Sherlock.
Whoa calm down, he admitted to having sex with her, of course he'd have DNA present.
 
Quick question...

Is this a witch hunt? ( Sherdog Wise )

Like when for several years everyone sh*t on him for having a kid... that come to find out wasn't even his kid.

You know. Everyone on here is 100% convinced after a civil hearing , because they were there and after he was done with her he also showed them a proper time.

I mean..

No, they allegedly weren't confident of a conviction.

Or is this just a reason to finally get away with Fighter Bashing.

No, if you go on RTE you can read the blow by blow account of the trial. I am 100% convinced he's guilty and I didn't even really dislike him before.
 
Guy fails to realize the irony of accepting an  alternative reality based on the information he finds from unverifiable and disreputable sources then claiming everyone else are sheep


Ain't it sad that more people wanted to leave this forum over 2fa?

Rape apologists. ALMOST, as bad as checking your email to log in once a month.
were you taking a dig at me bro? Im a bit confused.
 
but you are only fairly certain he is more than an innocent bystander..
Yes, was just treading lightly as I didn;t know the rules on calling someone out on something without a conviction as I know forums have rules in place. I was meaning that 100% he wasn't Mr Cordial, and from what it sounds like things went quite far and it seems like they should have had enough evidence to go forward with charges, but sadly didn't. Wasn't meaning to make him out like he was just a walking by happenstance victim. He deserves much more than what he has ever got IMHO
 
Some are calling this case open and shut... He'd be locked up if this would have been taken to criminal court...

Shouldn't she have gotten more than a quarter million dollars? Not even a Raquel Pennington payday.
Yeah, true -- they're basing whether or not the incident occured on how they view his character, not actual facts.
 
Back
Top