News Judge orders Mcgregor to destroy cctv footage in Nikita hand case; US company reviews evidence refuses to terminated sponsorship of Mcgregor

[flowoftruth]

FYI - the us company is tidl sport and mcgregor is a co-founder of it

 

[Only Here for Attachments]

I had to google that but it sounds like the British version of Shark Tank.

It's much better than Shark Tank, especially the Canadian version.

 

[Siver!]

FYI - the us company is tidl sport and mcgregor is a co-founder of it

Great to hear Conor stuck with Conor through thick and thin

 

[ocfightfan]

Courts should be about upholding the law and not going after people you dislike. They should so not be considering things outside their jurisdiction or the case in question, like some strange sense of cosmic justice. You are there for how the law applies to the facts of the case before you. Not balancing some divine scales because you think a guy is an asshole outside the case.

 

[agibmxmma]

Yeah, clearly that woman wanted to be beat so bad that it was amongst the worst cases that trauma nurses have ever seen in their life. I can't believe there are still people so confidently and quickly running to the defense of a rapist just because "everything is a conspiracy and corruption, blah blah!!! Women evil gold diggers! blahblah"

The "she was in it for the money" angle has been debunked numerous times and makes no sense if you have basic thinking abilities. So much angry incel energy on sherdog that it is ridiculous.

The same people still root for Mike Tyson and mourn over Kobe Bryant.. two other pieces of shyt.

 

[Iroh]

I don’t think you read what I said, I merely said the standards of proof for conviction in accordance with US law and somehow that seems to have triggered you.

I didn’t state anything that I don’t think was just straight up factual. I didn’t even say Conor shouldn’t have been found guilty in the civil trial, I just stated what it all means.

It is factually ingenuine to say he did rape Nikitia hand though because he was found guilty of it in a civil case.

It is factually accurate to state a jury found him 51% likely to have done the accusations levied against him. Anymore or any less is inaccurate and speculative opinion.

He wasn't found guilty though , he was found liable.

 

[ChangeIsComing]

While I agree that Conor is a degenerate, this is true. Ordering destruction of evidence in a case is an incredibly odd decision for a judge, however, I have not passed the UK BAR so it could be some technicality in their system.

If Conor had video evidence of the sexual encounter and the alleged victim did not consent to it (had no idea) then its non-admissible. Its the same law we have here in Canada and I believe in the USA, the only way it would be allowed is if the alleged victim agrees to it, but no way she does that then in turn it has to be destroyed as its considered illegal.

But this is just my assumption, as usual we do not get the full picture or at least I have not seen the full detail of this situation.

Regardless Conor is a piece of shit, had to smh again today as I read he spit on a fans face for saying "Lets go Khabib" guy has just turned into such a piece of crap and it just keeps getting worse and worse, he lost me as a fan a few years back.

 

[joy2day]

There are slander laws for that, it’s not for a judge to erase negative evidence that can make the plaintiff look bad.

What Conor was doing was trying to put forward bits of pieces of evidence to create a distorted picture, which is what the judge is stopping him from doing; Conor is the only one trying to slander and mislead.

The judge is not erasing the evidence, she is deleting Conor's copy that was given to him which he doesn't have a right to keep. If it were to come up again legally, the state would still have a copy.

 

[Whitestallion]

Who cares… throw him under the jail at this point.

His fighting days are long gone. I don’t want to hear his crackhead rants anymore.

The sport has moved past McGregor.

He knows this too - which is why he wants to be owner of BKFC, boxing superstar, movie actor, business man and now President of Ireland LOL

He’s trying whatever he can to make a living. Clear sign of a failed career.

I won't give up on him, he's an addict and he needs help.

If he gets help, this guy slept the P4P#1 guy in 20 seconds.
This guy took the hardest possible punch Khabib can throw and dropped to a knee before throwing a flying knee back. Khabib said in an interview that punch changed him forever, he had never landed a shot like that (that didn't KO someone) and it made him question things.

This is the guy who stood T2T with Eddie at a time Eddie ended JG.

Get clean CM and we'll see you soon brother.

 

[Superzorro]

Never heard of a judge ordering someone not to just refrain from disclosure but to also get rid of the evidence. I don’t know Irish law, but there’s zero chance you can do that in the States. No way a judge can make someone destroy evidence/information because it’s protected, at most, it’s gotta be confidential, not eliminated.

I don't think the evidence would change anything. What could it possibly be? If it's everything leading up to the actual crime, it wouldn't matter if she seems to be in a cheerful, consensual disposition before they enter the hotel room. He could have just sprung it all on her once he knew there were no cameras. It proves nothing, unless the tape shows her leaving the hotel room without McGregor and she doesn't have any injuries.

 

[Alpha_T83]

The situation involving Conor McGregor occurred in Ireland, where the High Court issued an order requiring him to delete copies of CCTV footage related to the civil rape case. The court’s concern was likely to prevent unauthorized sharing or misuse of sensitive evidence, particularly on social media.

In the United States, a similar scenario could unfold, but there are key differences in civil procedure, evidence handling, and court orders:

1. Court Orders and Protective Orders:
   • In the U.S., courts can issue protective orders restricting how evidence, including CCTV footage, is used.
   • If evidence is deemed sensitive, a judge may order that it not be disseminated publicly or used outside of legal proceedings.
   • If a party violates such an order, they could be held in contempt of court, fined, or face other legal consequences.
2. Evidence Preservation vs. Destruction:
   • The U.S. discovery process requires parties to preserve relevant evidence.
   • If a party were ordered to delete evidence after the case concluded, they would need to show compliance, often through sworn affidavits or reports from forensic experts.
   • However, spoliation of evidence (destroying or altering evidence improperly) can result in serious legal consequences, including adverse inferences at trial.
3. Public Access to Court Records:
   • U.S. courts generally favor public access to court records, especially in civil cases.
   • If the footage had been used as trial evidence, it might become public unless sealed by the court.
   • A judge could issue a gag order or confidentiality order if releasing the footage would cause harm or privacy violations.

Would a U.S. Court Order Someone to Delete CCTV Footage?​

• Yes, but under limited circumstances. If the footage was deemed confidential, a U.S. court could order it not to be shared or require its deletion after the case concludes.
• More commonly, courts would seal evidence rather than demand deletion. This ensures legal oversight while preserving the evidence for future appeals.

Key Differences from the Irish Court’s Order:​

1. In the U.S., courts emphasize evidence preservation for appeals and future cases. Ordering complete deletion is rare.
2. If deletion is ordered, courts would likely require a detailed forensic report or affidavit from a neutral third party, not just a sworn statement from the defendant.
3. Public access laws vary by state and case type. Civil cases often have more transparency than criminal cases.

In summary, while a U.S. court could issue a similar order under specific conditions, it would more likely seal the evidence rather than demand its deletion.

Thanks ChatGPT.

Pretty much what I said in this thread, without needing AI. In the US a judge would issue a protective order to prevent the dissemination of discovery, but that has to be done before hand. It's hard to issue a post-hoc protective order and have it make any sense.

If a defendant has evidence that supports their defense against a potential criminal charge, and there is no protective order in place, I absolutely cannot see a court in the US ordering the destruction of evidence. As I said before, the only way this would ever happen in the US is if the evidence was fabricated or tampered with, which doesn't appear to be the case in this situation.

This just confirms that Ireland is a woke totalitarian shithole. Kangaroo court.

 

[joy2day]

Thanks ChatGPT.

Pretty much what I said in this thread, without needing AI. In the US a judge would issue a protective order to prevent the dissemination of discovery, but that has to be done before hand. It's hard to issue a post-hoc protective order and have it make any sense.

If a defendant has evidence that supports their defense against a potential criminal charge, and there is no protective order in place, I absolutely cannot see a court in the US ordering the destruction of evidence. As I said before, the only way this would ever happen in the US is if the evidence was fabricated or tampered with, which doesn't appear to be the case in this situation.

This just confirms that Ireland is a woke totalitarian shithole. Kangaroo court.

Actually, the chatgtp was correct- th

Thanks ChatGPT.

Pretty much what I said in this thread, without needing AI. In the US a judge would issue a protective order to prevent the dissemination of discovery, but that has to be done before hand. It's hard to issue a post-hoc protective order and have it make any sense.

If a defendant has evidence that supports their defense against a potential criminal charge, and there is no protective order in place, I absolutely cannot see a court in the US ordering the destruction of evidence. As I said before, the only way this would ever happen in the US is if the evidence was fabricated or tampered with, which doesn't appear to be the case in this situation.

This just confirms that Ireland is a woke totalitarian shithole. Kangaroo court.

Except that isn't what the AI said, or the truth of the situation.

 

[Connection Lost]

Judges in Nikita Hand case orders Mcgregor to destroy of CCTV footage of him and Nikita Hand which may make people think negatively of Nikita Hand.

This is interesting, I would think Mcgregor has a right to use the CCTV footage, of course facing potential slander suits if he does use it and depending on how he uses it ( at least in the USA ).

It seems weird that the judge would order him to destroy the CCTV footage he has.

Conor McGregor says in court document he has deleted his copies of CCTV footage used in civil rape trial

Mixed martial arts fighter was directed to provide affidavit after being ordered not to disseminate CCTV

www.irishtimes.com

Also, recently a US company reviewed the evidence of the case and has decided to not end their sponsorship of Mcgregor.

US firm that sponsors Conor McGregor stands by MMA fighter after ‘reviewing’ evidence from civil rape case

One of Conor McGregor’s biggest sponsors, a US firm that makes pain relief sprays, has said it will continue its deal with the MMA fighter after reviewing “the evidence” from his recent civil case.

m.independent.ie

lol I've never seen such an attempt to not just say the fucking company name

 

[fzoid4454]

It actually has a lot to do with user input and the subject also. It would have been correct if I had used the reasoning model and given it a more detailed prompt. It was basically correct about the laws, it just missed that there was a copy other than Conor's.

I've seen it be flawed, but I've seen it do amazingly also. The problem is, we don't really understand how it works, and at the speed it's moving, we may not until it is too late.

Yes, the problem is user input AI basically casting wide nets into the Internet and basing it's "knowledge" on, very much, popularity of posts. It doesn't know how to weed out the trash and critically analyze information from misinformation. At least, not reliably.

 

[Sticko]

Thanks ChatGPT.

Pretty much what I said in this thread, without needing AI. In the US a judge would issue a protective order to prevent the dissemination of discovery, but that has to be done before hand. It's hard to issue a post-hoc protective order and have it make any sense.

If a defendant has evidence that supports their defense against a potential criminal charge, and there is no protective order in place, I absolutely cannot see a court in the US ordering the destruction of evidence. As I said before, the only way this would ever happen in the US is if the evidence was fabricated or tampered with, which doesn't appear to be the case in this situation.

This just confirms that Ireland is a woke totalitarian shithole. Kangaroo court.

They are not destroying the evidence, the court still has a copy. They are telling Conor to delete his copy of it, which he only had in preparation for litigation, in order to prevent Conor or one of his associates from harassing the victim by releasing it. The footage does not belong to Conor.

Prosecutors have already declined to bring criminal charges in this case but if they ever changed their mind, I am sure the footage still exists and Conor would once again have access to it for the purposes of preparing his defense.

 

[fzoid4454]

Evidence he subpoenaed for most likely. The CCTV footage was used as defendant’s primary evidence to show consensual sex.

You make it sound like it belonged to Plaintiff and Plaintiff was using it as part of their case. I recall the footage being tried to be explained by Plaintiff, not used.

Also, are you saying that if Conor somehow got another copy from the hotel, he can use it however he wants and not violate the order?

I never, anywhere said it belonged to the plaintiff. Nor did I suggest it. Pointing out that it's not Conor's property doesn't magically suggest that it belongs to the plaintiff. I specifically talk about the court having it for their records, and the hotel having it for theirs. So, where you found the idea that I "suggested" it belongs to the plaintiff, I'm not sure, but it seems like you pulled it out of your ass.

Surveillance videos are generally not released to anyone who asks for them. They are released to law enforcement, generally, or on demand of a court order or subpoena.

Conor was found liable for sexual assault. The other person accused was found not to be liable. We're talking about the person who the jury determined did NOT engage in consensual sex not being allowed to selectively disseminate sensitive evidence used in a case THEY LOST to smear the person they already were found liable for harming.

You seem to imagine a lot of arguments I never make. Not sure if English is your first language or not. I'm talking about court order not being about shutting down Conor's inherent rights or confiscating something that is rightfully his property. It's about treating court evidence like court evidence, and especially in sexual assault cases, you don't allow that shit to be disseminated.

Now I'll put words in your mouth - if this was a revenge porn case, are you saying it would be fair game for the accused/guilty to go ahead post the home porn AFTER the case is over?

 

[Xanzito]

S

 

[IvanDrago2.0]

Just shows how corrupt Dublin has become unfortunately. They know Conor is innocent would like the evidence to disappear. Hope Conor leaves Dublin and other stars/athletes do the same

 

[Alpha_T83]

They are not destroying the evidence, the court still has a copy. They are telling Conor to delete his copy of it, which he only had in preparation for litigation, in order to prevent Conor or one of his associates from harassing the victim by releasing it. The footage does not belong to Conor.

Prosecutors have already declined to bring criminal charges in this case but if they ever changed their mind, I am sure the footage still exists and Conor would once again have access to it for the purposes of preparing his defense.

I would never trust the court to retain any evidence that you might need yourself. At a bare minimum I would want my own lawyer to be in possession of the evidence.

 

[joy2day]

Yes, the problem is user input AI basically casting wide nets into the Internet and basing it's "knowledge" on, very much, popularity of posts. It doesn't know how to weed out the trash and critically analyze information from misinformation. At least, not reliably.

That's a problem if the user isn't skilled. If you know how to write prompts and vet answers through referencing and spend the time to do it, you get good answers without much problem.