Chat 🔥🤬General Chat Thread

[Mowl]

Bizarre article, this one: never read one like it in an Irish paper before now, at least not that I can recall.

The Conor McGregor rape trial: looks well dodgy - and from every angle.

Conor McGregor outside the High Court today.


A WOMAN WHO alleges that Mixed Martial Arts fighter Conor McGregor sexually assaulted her in a Dublin hotel has rejected a suggestion by his senior counsel that she had consensual sex with him twice.
Nikita Hand (Ní Laimhín) alleges that McGregor (36) “sexually assaulted her, and in effect, raped her” in a hotel penthouse in Dublin on 9 December 2018, and that a second defendant, James Lawrence, of Rafter’s Road, Drimnagh, “did likewise”, Mr Justice Alexander Owens told the jury on Tuesday.
The allegations in the action are fully denied.
The action was brought in 2021 against McGregor. The civil trial is expected to last two weeks.
On the third day of the trial, Remy Farrell SC, for McGregor, cross examined Hand about the alleged sexual assault.
Referring to evidence she previously gave in court where she said that she bit McGregor and he did not like it, Farrell read from Ms Hand’s statement of claim, which stated that when she bit McGregor, “he advised her that he enjoyed her actions”.
Ms Hand said that McGregor liked her struggling and trying to get away from him “but when I bit him really hard, he did not like that.”
When asked if she said anything to McGregor before the alleged assault, Ms Hand said she tried to talk him out of it and told him that she knew his partner.
“I was on my period, I had a tampon in. I wasn’t looking for sex,” she told the court.
When asked if she heard anything from the other room, she said no.
When asked if she remembered where she bit McGregor, she said: “I can’t remember where I bit him. I just know I bit him. I can’t remember what part of his body I got.”
Farrell asked Ms Hand if she remembered McGregor or Lawrence flirting with her or her friend in the sitting room of the penthouse. She said no.
Farrell put it to Ms Hand that when she, McGregor, Lawrence and her friend were in the sitting room of the penthouse, that McGregor went to the bedroom and that she followed him in, and that she approached McGregor when he was using the toilet in the ensuite bathroom.
He put it to her that she and McGregor started kissing and at that stage his belt and jeans were open because he had been using the toilet. He put it to her that you “largely took your own clothes off” and that they were both “sexually excited”.
Ms Hand said she did not agree with that.
Farrell suggested to her that at that point, she started to give McGregor oral sex. Ms Hand said no.
He suggested to her that they then went and had sex on the bed. Ms Hand said no.
Farrell said that during this, her friend and Lawrence were in the sitting room of the penthouse. Ms Hand said they were not in the bedroom.
Farrell put it to her that at some point during the afternoon, her friend and Lawrence had sex. Ms Hand said she did not remember that.
Farrell suggested to her that the noise of this was quite obvious and that they were having sex at a similar time that she was having sex with McGregor. Ms Hand said she does not remember anyone having sex.
Farrell asked Ms Hand if she remembered going out of the bedroom into the sitting room of the penthouse when her friend and Lawrence were having sex. Ms Hand said she did not remember that.
Farrell suggested to her that she went into the sitting room and was “slagging” her friend and Lawrence and made a lewd remark about oral sex. “That’s disgusting. I don’t remember that,” Ms Hand said.
Farrell suggested that while McGregor was asleep, Ms Hand and Lawrence lifted both his legs up. “No it didn’t happen. None of this, what he’s saying, happened,” Ms Hand told the court.
Farrell suggested that McGregor told her to get lost. “No,” Ms Hand said.
“And that this was, maybe towards the end of the period?” Farrell said.
“None of this is true,” Ms Hand said.

Nikita Hand arriving at the High Court this week.

Farrell put it to Ms Hand that she had sex with McGregor a second time and that he did not ejaculate. “None of this is true,” Ms Hand said.
“I’m putting it to you that you had sex with Mr McGregor in various different positions,” Farrell said.
“It didn’t happen,” Ms Hand said.
“And that your legs were on his shoulders at some point?” Farrell said.
“I was raped, I’m not going to agree with any of what you’re saying,” Ms Hand said.
Farrell suggested that there were various points where McGregor had his hands on the back of her thighs and on her buttocks. “I don’t have a comment because this is like a made up story,” Ms Hand said.
Farrell put it to Ms Hand that she was “an enthusiastic participant” and that she made noises and said things to that effect.
Later, Farrell referred to Ms Hand’s evidence to the jury that when she got home, she told her partner that she had been raped but that she did not tell him who had raped her.

Recording​

A lengthy recording that was made by Ms Hand’s partner at the time when she returned home on the night of 9 December was played in court. Ms Hand was not aware that she was being recorded and only found out about it later, the court heard.
In the recording, Ms Hand can be heard crying and telling her former partner that she “tried to fight” and that she “bit him”.
She repeatedly said “I’m sorry” to her former partner, and told him numerous times that she could not tell him the identity of the person who had raped her after he repeatedly asked her.

She can be heard twice saying “He told me he’d kill me”.
At one point, she can be heard telling her former partner “I had my period and I had a tampon up me and I don’t even know where it’s gone now.”
“I’m sorry, it’s not my fault. It’s not my fault,” she could be heard repeating.
Her former partner can be heard telling her he doesn’t “give a f*** who warned you or threatened you” and telling her that he just wants to know where she was. She tells him that she was in the Morgan Hotel with the women she went to her work Christmas party with.
When her former partner asks if they are still in town, Ms Hand can be heard telling him that they had gone home.
When her former partner continued to ask who the alleged attacker was, she can be heard asking him to “please let me get through tonight”.
When her former partner tells her that he is going to call Gardaí, she can be heard saying “Please don’t do that to me”.
She can be heard on the recording asking her former partner to look at her knuckles and saying they were bruised “from fighting back”.
She can also be heard saying “He was choking me and I couldn’t breathe” and saying “Three times he done it to me. I thought I was dead, I thought I was gone.”
Her former partner continues to inquire about what happened and who was involved, and Ms Hand can be heard arguing with him and telling him that all he cared about “is reassuring yourself”.
“That’s all you care about. How do you think my mind feels right now? I’m after being sexually abused,” she can be heard saying.
She can also be heard saying “Why me? Why me? Why me?”.
When her former partner says he is “doing something about this”, referring to what allegedly happened to her, Ms Hand can be heard telling him: “You’re not doing anything. The only thing you should be doing is supporting me right now and you haven’t done any of that, you haven’t even put your arms around me. I’m not a slut and you think I am. I’m not like that.”
She can be heard telling him that she can’t tell him the identity of the man who allegedly
assaulted her because he “would tell the nation”.
She can be heard asking him to “let me get through the hospital tomorrow” and they can talk about it.
She can also be heard asking if their relationship is going to be affected by it, and repeating that she is sorry and “I done nothing wrong”. Her former partner can be heard telling her to stop saying sorry.

CCTV​

Earlier this morning, Ms Hand denied that CCTV footage from the Beacon Hotel “flatly contradicts” her version of events.
Farrell put it to Ms Hand that her friend was in the other room when she claims she was raped on 9 December. He asked if she said or did anything to “tip off” her friend that something had happened to her. Ms Hand said she did not because she didn’t remember at that point.
Farrell put it to her that she had woken up beside a man who was not her partner in a hotel bed after a night out, and that it appeared from the account she had given to the court yesterday that at that stage that she had no memory of being raped. Repeating evidence that she had given earlier in the trial she said she had woken “in a panic” and had asked McGregor the time.
Farrell asked if her primary concern when she woke up was the time of day. Ms Hand said it was “because I had fallen asleep. When I go to a party, it’s strange for me to fall asleep”.
Farrell put it to Ms Hand that the jury had seen CCTV footage of her going down in the lift after the alleged assault at around 6.15pm and being “very affectionate” towards McGregor.
Ms Hand said she could not remember that.
Farrell asked if she could remember going down in the lift and going back up to the penthouse with James Lawrence. She said she did not remember what they were doing or saying in the lift.
She said of the CCTV footage: “It’s not me, it’s not my character, I see a very vulnerable woman, a very drunk woman, I should’ve been looked after in that state. I should’ve been brought home.”
Farrell put it to Ms Hand that she appeared to kiss McGregor’s arm in the CCTV footage. Ms Hand said: “I don’t remember that. I don’t remember what I’m doing at that stage.”
Farrell asked if there was any reason for her friend to notice anything untoward. Ms Hand said she could not speak for her friend.
Farrell put it to her that the last she saw of her friend on the evening of 9 December was her getting into a car “with a man who violently raped you”. Ms Hand said yes.
Asked if she tried to speak to her friend at any stage, Ms Hand said she told her in a text message that she had been raped when she was in the Rotunda Hospital’s Sexual Assault Treatment Unit.
Farrell asked Ms Hand if she had asked her friend to delete the text messages between them. Ms Hand said she probably did “because I told other people to because I was afraid for my life”.
Farrell asked if she also deleted text messages to her friend that asked her to delete the texts.
“I deleted a lot of text messages and I told other people to as well because I didn’t want to press charges and I was afraid,” Ms Hand said.
She agreed with Farrell that she had told gardaí that her friend “doesn’t want to say anything because Conor dropped her home and she is scared because she knows he knows where she lives and I don’t want to force her”.
Farrell asked if she was reluctant for gardaí to speak to her friend.
Ms Hand said: “No, I didn’t mind. I was worried about her because I knew she was scared, so I didn’t want to push her into a decision that would make her frightened in any way because it was about me.”
Farrell put it to Ms Hand that in her evidence, she said she had told the manager of her salon that she had been sexually assaulted. He asked if she was concerned that she had told her something different. Ms Hand said no. “I know I told her I was raped and I had a lot of bruises on my body. I don’t know what type of detail I told her.”
Farrell asked if she remembered telling her that she woke up with two bodyguards coming into the room, or if she remembered telling her that she jumped up and ran out because she thought she were going to be gang raped. Ms Hand said she did not remember telling her this.
Farrell asked if she told the manager of her salon to delete things. Ms Hand accepted that she did.
She also accepted that she deleted her Instagram account after the alleged assault. When asked why, she said: “I didn’t want to be on any more social media because everyone was talking about it and it was in the papers.”
She told gardaí she “deleted Conor from my Instagram, I blocked him”.
Ms Hand said no one had told her to delete her account and that “I deleted it off my own back”. But she later agreed with Farrell that she had previously told gardaí that she got a phone call from a garda at 2am telling her to deactivate her Instagram account as people were looking to take photos from it.
She said: “I didn’t want to have to deal with people trying to take my own personal photographs from my page and sending them to group chats and talking about me.”
Farrell said that of the CCTV that they had seen, a significant part showed her with her mobile phone. He said that despite her suggestion that she was vulnerable, she was clearly able to operate a mobile phone.
Ms Hand said she did not remember any of what was shown in the CCTV.
Farrell said she had texted her partner’s sister and her then-partner, and had made a phone call to McGregor at 6.27pm on the evening of the 9 December.
Ms Hand said she did not remember attempting to call McGregor.
Farrell asked if she was “looking to have a chat” with McGregor. Ms Hand said: “I don’t know why I rang him. There’s a lot of hanging around in the CCTV footage. I know James took my phone on the CCTV footage. I don’t remember any of that.”
She said the CCTV footage “is me but it’s not my character and I don’t remember it and I don’t want to have to look at it again, it’s very disturbing for me.”
Farrell put it to Ms Hand that the reason why it is disturbing for her was that everything in that footage “flatly contradicts the story you’ve told”.
“That CCTV footage does not take away from what happened to me,” Ms Hand said.
“I was brutally raped and battered and that CCTV footage does not take away from what happened to me. I know what happened to me.”
Ms Hand became distressed and asked if she could have a break and the court was adjourned for ten minutes.
When the hearing resumed, Farrell put it to Ms Hand that the reason she was distressed “was because I was asking you questions about the CCTV footage and you found it very hard to look at that footage”.
He said she told the jury yesterday that when she went out, she was not looking for sexual activity or romantic entanglement. “No I wasn’t,” Ms Hand said.
Farrell said the CCTV “appears to suggest that you were interested in romantic entanglement”. Ms Hand said she can’t remember any of it.
“As far as you’re telling the jury that you’d no interest in romantic entanglement, that seems to be contradicted by the CCTV?” Farrell said.
“I can’t remember the CCTV,” Ms Hand said.
Farrell said that from the CCTV, it seemed that Hand had “romantic desirements” towards James Lawrence. “Yeah I did see that,” Hand said.
“There’s a point where you appear to be kissing him?” Farrell said.
“Yeah it looked that way,” Hand said.
Farrell put it to her that she was wrong when she said she was not looking for sexual activity or romantic entanglement. “I don’t think I’m wrong, I just don’t remember any of it,” Ms Hand said.
Farrell asked her why she did not leave the hotel when McGregor left. Ms Hand said she didn’t know. “I have no idea why I stayed,” she said.
Farrell asked Ms Hand if she has a history of blackouts. She said no. He said she was “not necessarily a stranger to hitting it hard on a night out”.
“I used to. I was in my 20s, I was living my life, enjoying myself,” Ms Hand said.
Farrell put it to her that she had told the jury she could remember certain things and that certain things “are just gone out of” her brain.
He put it to her that those things were “everything from the point that McGregor leaves to when you’re back in the room sometime later”.
“There’s a lot of things I don’t remember from that weekend,” Ms Hand said.
Earlier, she agreed with Farrell that she had been wrong when she told gardaí she was in the Morgan Hotel in Temple Bar in Dublin city centre, rather than the Beacon Hotel in Sandyford.
Referring to her evidence, Farrell told Hand that she had indicated in her previous evidence that she thought it was the Morgan Hotel because of the style of bath in the penthouse and the interior of the hotel. Ms Hand said this was correct.
Farrell said that when the car entered the car park of the hotel, it would appear from the CCTV footage that there is a gap of around 15-16 minutes between the car coming in and the four of them going to the door to the elevator.
Ms Hand said she does not recall. When asked if she disagrees with that, she said she does not disagree, she just doesn’t remember.
Farrell asked if she was curious about where they were during those minutes before going up to the penthouse. Ms Hand said at the time she wasn’t, that they were in the car, having a drink and a laugh and that she did not ask where they were going.
Referring to a photograph of the door to the elevator, Farrell put it to Ms Hand that there are letters above the door that read Beacon Hotel. He asked Ms Hand if she saw those letters before going through the door on the night in question. Hand said she did not, and pointed out that the letters are above the door.
“I’m drunk, you can see from the CCTV that I’m vulnerable.”
She said she does not remember being in the car park. “I don’t think everyone remembers absolutely everything when they’re drunk.”
Farrell asked Ms Hand if she was aware that there was CCTV footage from the hotel when she spoke to Gardaí in January 2019. Ms Hand said she was not aware.
He referred to her previous evidence, where she said that she only became aware that she had been in the Beacon Hotel when Gardaí informed her. When asked when Gardaí informed her of this, she said she could not remember if it was before her initial interview or afterwards. “I’m sure they told me, I can’t remember when they told me. It’s six years later,” she said.
Farrell asked Ms Hand if it had ever occurred to her that if Gardaí had not figured out it was the Beacon Hotel, that there would be no CCTV available. Ms Hand said it had never occurred to her.
The trial continues this afternoon before Mr Justice Alexander Owens and a jury of eight women and four men.

It's kind of like 'The News In 3D Virtual Reality' where you don't even need to be there in the courts to get the stink of it.

 

[Mowl]

Day Two: same trial, same place, same people. Nikita Hand (Ní Laimhín) V Conor McGregor/James Lawrence.

We all understand that violent assault/rape trials can be very difficult for everyone involved, not just the alleged victim. Most rape trials tend to preserve anonymity by either by law or by request so those cases don't usually have a public gallery eyeballing the unfolding details. Close family members only, right? I'm also sure that not only the victim emerges out the other end of the courts chastened by the whole experience. Everyone involved will take something of it with them and they have to live with their experience. I was called for jury duty around the mid-90s; I attended too. Around eighty of us stood in a room under The Four Courts while some process was taking place in the court itself. We could see it on the TV monitors, and hear it too. The case was about some elderly bloke having attacked and raped a teenager in a public park on the north side of Dublin. Overhearing the details being read out on the monitor caught me by surprise and I wondered if it was an error. But anyway: I wasn't chosen to sit on the trial having been first nominated by one party and then objected to by the other. I was processed out, thanked for my time, and subsequently told I wouldn't be called for jury again within the next ten years. Fine by me, I was happy to go back to work.

That was then, and this is weird. We live in a time where attaching any celebrity's name to some sleazy sexual scenario is worth its weight in gold. Members of juries are obliged by law to avoid reading or discussing any evidential or otherwise details of the case they're hearing, but this one is rather different. I've never seen anything like this before, have you? Every question, every reply, lots of descriptive details accompanying the press photos, the locations, the alleged times, and everyone's full name included?

That's new, no?

Even weirder is why the alleged victim would put herself through this (win or lose) in the full public glare?

James Lawrence arriving at court this week.

Woman says James Lawrence is 'lying' about having sex with her as his lawyer cross-examines her.

A WOMAN WHO claims she was sexually assaulted by Mixed Martial Arts fighter Conor McGregor has rejected suggestions that she had consensual sex with a second accused man on the night in question.
Nikita Hand (Ní Laimhín) alleges that McGregor (36) “sexually assaulted her, and in effect, raped her” in a hotel penthouse in Dublin on 9 December 2018, and that a second defendant, James Lawrence, of Rafter’s Road, Drimnagh, “did likewise”, Mr Justice Alexander Owens told the jury on the first day of the civil trial.
The allegations in the action are fully denied.
The action was brought in 2021 against McGregor. The civil trial is expected to last two weeks.
This afternoon, on the fourth day of the civil trial, John Fitzgerald SC, appearing for Lawrence, began his cross-examination of Ms Hand.
“Perhaps a curious feature of Mr Lawrence’s case is that he’s here not because of what you said, but because of what he said,” Fitzgerald told the court.
“Because in fact he brought himself into this case by something he said to the guards in January 2019. He did so after you had been given a number of opportunities to discuss what happened.”
He put it to Ms Hand that the first person she told about the alleged assault was her manager. He said there is a lack of clarity over aspects of what she told her.
“But one aspect is clear. You were talking about a singular assailant. There was no second man,” he said.
Ms Hand agreed, adding: “I had no problem with James.”
Fitzgerald referred to the instances in which Ms Hand had disclosed the alleged assault, with her former partner, his sister, the Rotunda Hospital Sexual Assault Treatment Unit, the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre and gardaí.
“Each time, it was ‘he’, not ‘they’,” he said.
Ms Hand agreed.
Referring to her initial statement to gardaí, Fitzgerald put it to Ms Hand that she told police that nothing happened between her and Lawrence in the penthouse suite. She agreed.
Fitzgerald told the court that Lawrence was interviewed by gardaí as a witness on 17 January and gave a statement on 18 January. In this statement, Lawrence told gardaí that he had had consensual sex with Ms Hand on two occasions. Ms Hand was subsequently invited to give a second statement to gardaí in the wake of this.
Fitzgerald referred to Ms Hand’s previous evidence to the court, in which she said she was “shocked” by Lawrence’s statement.
“Do you not believe him?” He asked her.
“No, I think he’s lying,” Ms Hand said.
“He’s lying about having sex with you?” Fitzgerald asked.
“Absolutely,” Ms Hand responded.
“Your account in other words is you remember being in the room, and you remember having sex with one person and that is Mr McGregor?” Fitzgerald asked.
“I remember being in the room and being raped by McGregor,” Ms Hand said.
Fitzgerald put it to her that she had “two periods of loss of memory”, the first being when she claimed she fell asleep after the alleged assault.
He suggested to her that she was not asleep during this period and that in fact, “a lot went on during that period involving yourself, Mr McGregor, Mr Lawrence and [her friend]”.
He put it to her that she and McGregor were being “very affectionate” towards each other and “pulling out of each other”.
Ms Hand said she can’t remember.
Fitzgerald put it to her that at some point, she and McGregor went into the bedroom of the penthouse suite to have sex. Ms Hand said no.
Fitzgerald put it to her that the door was left open and that she and McGregor could be heard clearly having sex, and that the noises indicated that “you were having a good time, not a bad time”.
“No. I don’t agree with any of this,” Ms Hand said.
Fitzgerald put it to her that while she and McGregor were having sex in the bedroom of the penthouse, that Lawrence and her friend began to have sex in the sitting room of the penthouse.
“I don’t know,” Ms Hand said.
“That is something I’m going to suggest that you do know, because you were coming in and out of the bedroom and you saw it on a number of occasions,” Fitzgerald said.
Ms Hand said she had no memory of that. “I think this is another made up story,” she told the court.
Fitzgerald put it to her that she did not appear in any way unhappy or stressed during those times.
“I disagree. I can’t comment to it. It’s just another made up story,” Ms Hand said.
Fitzgerald put it to her that this went on for “some considerable time” and that Lawrence had sex with her friends three times. He put it to her that at one point, when Lawrence was going to the bathroom, he could see Ms Hand having consensual sex with McGregor a second time.
“Lies,” Ms Hand said.

Recording​

On Thursday, during cross-examination by Remy Farrell SC, for McGregor, Ms Hand rejected a suggestion that she had consensual sex with McGregor at the Beacon Hotel. A lengthy recording that was made by Ms Hand’s partner when she returned home on the night of 9 December 2018 was also played in court, in which Ms Hand could be heard telling her former partner that she had been raped. Under cross-examination this morning, Farrell asked Ms Hand about what she had said on the recording. Ms Hand accepted that she had told her former partner lies about where she had been, saying she was “too scared” to tell him the truth. When asked what lies she had told him, Ms Hand said she lied about the people who had been present before the alleged assault.


Farrell said she told her former partner she had been in the Morgan Hotel in Dublin city centre. Ms Hand repeated evidence that she had given previously in court, saying that that is where she thought she was because the interior was similar to the Beacon Hotel, where the alleged assault took place.
Farrell asked Ms Hand why she had told her former partner that she had been at the Morgan Hotel with colleagues from work.
“I didn’t want to tell him the truth. I lied to my boyfriend, it’s as simple as that. Me lying to my boyfriend doesn’t take away what happened to me. Lying to your boyfriend is not a crime. What happened to me is a crime,” she told the court.

Farrell said it’s a “very different situation” being in a hotel room with two men, and he put it to Ms Hand that she did not want to tell her former partner that she and a female friend were in a hotel room with two men. She agreed.
Farrell put it to Ms Hand that she had told her former partner, “He told me he’d kill me” and asked if that was a reference to McGregor.
“It was, yeah,” she said. Farrell put it to her that she “never once suggested in interviews with gardaí or in evidence that Mr McGregor threatened to kill you”.
“Is that something that happened or didn’t happen?” Farrell asked.
“I can’t remember,” Ms Hand said.
Farrell put it to her that “this was all part of a web of lies”.
“I did lie to my boyfriend. I know that,” Ms Hand said. Farrell put it to her that on the recording she told her former partner that she had bitten McGregor on the face and he had said that he would still have a mark on his face, to which she had agreed with him.
Farrell said that she had been in an elevator with McGregor after the alleged assault, and that “surely” she was aware while speaking to her former partner that McGregor did not have a bite mark on his face. Ms Hand said that she was confused.
“I remember biting him. I do remember biting him. All of this, I can’t remember any of this,” she said, referring to the audio recording, “but I know I did bite him.”
Referring to her claim for loss of earnings, Farrell put it to Ms Hand that she had indicated that had it not been for the alleged assault, she would have set up her own salon.
Ms Hand said she “would have loved to do that”, adding: “That was my dream.”
Farrell said she had been working part-time before the alleged assault and that setting up a salon was something that would require administrative skills.
“I’m sure it would,” Ms Hand said. Farrell put it to her that she would not necessarily have specific qualifications to set up her own salon.
“I feel I would,” Ms Hand said.
He asked her whether, after McGregor had picked up her and her friend and proceeded to pick up Lawrence, this was because he was “looking for another man to make up – I hesitate to call it a double date”.
“I’m not too sure what he was thinking,” Ms Hand said.
He asked if there was anything in the conversations before McGregor arrived at the salon that suggested that he was “coming to your party than that you were going to his”.
“No, because he said he’d come and get us,” Ms Hand said.
Concluding his cross examination, Farrell referred to Ms Hand’s previous evidence and asked her to identify what she could remember and what she could not.
He put it to her that she could remember getting to the Beacon Hotel and going up to the penthouse suite in the elevator but that she could not remember being affectionate towards McGregor in the elevator. Ms Hand said she just remembered being in the elevator and going to the penthouse suite.
Farrell put it to her that she remembered “being raped” but that she did not seem to remember this for a period after it happened. Ms Hand said she did not remember it had happened when she woke up.
Farrell put it to her that she remembered being back in the penthouse suite with Lawrence after the alleged assault and recalling it. Ms Hand said she could remember being back in the room and “getting upset and little things coming back to me, but not absolutely everything”.
Farrell put it to her that she remembered going to her manager’s house and telling her that she had been raped, but not remembering what she said. Ms Hand said she remembered telling her manager “that I was raped and choked, that’s all”.
Farrell put it to her that she remembered contacting friends that she had texted after the alleged assault and asking them to delete the messages. Ms Hand said that she did.

Warning to public​

Before proceedings began today, a note was passed to Mr Justice Owens from the jury. Mr Justice Owens told the court that the note stated that at the end of proceedings yesterday, members of the jury noticed someone in the public gallery above the courtroom using a mobile phone which was pointed at the jury.
Mr Justice Owens said that while he could not verify that this was true without a proper investigation, he said that such a thing would be completely inappropriate and that he was going to arrange that a guard be stationed in the public gallery. He also said that he was going to “keep a careful eye on it”.

He said that looking at the public gallery this morning, it struck him that “only those who are able to sit in the gallery should be present”. He said it was designed to accommodate only those who can sit in it, and that “if you can’t sit down, you have to leave”. He referred to one man who was standing and asked him to leave. Mr Justice Owens also said that it is a contempt of court to take photographs of the jury and “there will be steps taken to deal with the matter in the event that anybody is suspected of it”.


The trial, before Mr Justice Owens and a jury of eight women and four men, continues on Tuesday.

Deadly night for a pint over in The Black Forge, no?

 

[David]

---

 

[Mowl]

Man who set fire to Garda car in Dublin riot apologises 'to the government and everyone involved'

Judge Orla Crowe remanded Donaghey in custody pending sentence on Wednesday.

www.thejournal.ie

Although my first address was on the north side of the river Liffey in Chapelizod, we lived on the banks of the river and slept most nights to the sound of the nearby weir hissing and bubbling in the night. Then we moved over the river and up the hill to Ballyfermot. The only other time I ever lived on the northside of Dublin was around 1996/7 when I took a room in a large shared space with six other friends. I did it because I needed to store my stuff while out on a nine week Europe/Scandinavian tour. The house was at the top end of North Great George's Street, a lovely red brick Georgian building with four floors and a basement. I had the front basement room with a huge window and I set up a futon and sub-let it to a Spanish friend.

Back then there wasn't any persons of colour hanging around. I often walked home from wherever I was playing in the city and it was a handy address for the short while I lived there. Last time I passed through was in 2017 when home for a family wedding weekender out of town. I came from Dublin airport via Clontarf (to see a man about a bag) and I walked into the centre from there. Arriving along Parnell was a fucking fright alright. Geezers everywhere, hoods up, gloves on, baseball caps pulled down low, whispering, hustling, begging, gawking. You just knew that if you took your eye off the ball for even a second that you were mincemeat. I watched some local Irish girls on their way here and there and they all stared straight ahead, they were avoiding eye contact with any of the street corner imports. It was sad and scary. It didn't feel at all like home, and I'd only landed a couple of hours before.

Looking at it all now, it reminds me more of Amsterdam in the late 80s/early 90s. Heavy fuckers, the sort with a chib in the sock and a Stanley knife in the jacket pocket. I was living on the edge of the red light district in a legal squat along De Oudeschaans. I never did any business with street dealers, apart from one night around 2001 when we went out looking for supper after a show. Everywhere was shut. I didn't recognize the place. After midnight and nobody around. Apart from this one guy in a doorway looking at us.

'Shawarma?' he says.
What?
'Shawarma?'
Ehh, yeah - cool.
'Food? You want eat?'
Yes, actually - but nowhere's open.
You come with me.

So we follow the guy down the street and he pulls up a shutter and turns on the lights. A take-away bar with two tables for four and a bar/shelf along the wall. The food was warm, the smell was good, so we ordered and asked if we could stay and eat. He agreed, but we had to be quiet, and off he goes to lock the shutter. Nam nam, it was great, so I ordered another to go. He begged us not to eat nearby if we were leaving. I packed mine away for the hotel and off we went. He invited us back anytime and we'd have the friendly prices he reserved for friends. The law closed him down at 1100pm, it was killing his business so he did what he had to to keep going.

It occurred to me that night in Dublin that this was exactly what Dublin was headed for. A city divided not just by a river but also by a cultural mismatch that you could pretty much smell the blood of. The African and other cultures moving into Parnell Street and taking over all the addresses on the north side of the street facing Fibber McGee's with phone shops (that sold weed) those mad looking hairdressers with the fake dreads and ropes (also doing weed) nail salons (selling weed) laptop repairs (and weed) and small supermarkets specializing in imported foods I didn't want to know anything about. Along with weed.

So when the day eventually comes and weed is legalized, what will the outcome be for the African dealers on Parnell and the real big-time Irish dealers who own Dublin? If it's going to be coffeeshops, who among the Africans can afford the license and the lease? If it's going to be pharmacies (which I seriously doubt) then all hell's going to break loose regarding what else they stock their shelves with. Prescription medicines will still be abused even if there is weed available. And booze.

Dublin's primarily a drinking destination for most incoming tourists over for the long weekends. That said, coke and weed, ecstasy and crack are all easily available even if rather expensive. But that's Dublin for you: there aren't any cheap places left in Ireland in terms of making your money stretch. Weed you can get on any street corner. Not that I'd buy anything on the street. Fuck that, I like living.

The geezer here who set a cop car alight, then danced on the hood of another, then got involved with an arson attack on a Luas carriage, and then went on a looting spree has said his sorries to the state and the court saying that he got caught up in the moment after hearing about the kids getting stabbed outside the creche door. In fairness, I can understand the moment and how it might have affected me had I been there. That geezer had a relative attending the creche. Again, ask yourself how YOU would have reacted? He's suffering from depression and anxiety. Two things that don't take a break from destroying your life for you. He's medicated and looking to check in to clean up. All in all he did tens of thousands of euros in damage. The Irish courts are tetchy about money and tend to throw the book at tax dodgers and other garlic-loving criminals. Geezer will find out by the end of the week what his future's going to be.

But no matter how shocking a vista the riots were, they're nothing on what's coming down the line for Dublin city centre over the next five to ten years. You think it's a ghetto/no-go area now? Give it a while. Give it a while more. It hasn't even reached bottom yet, so what ever plans you're making for your future, factor in a no-go capital city as a guaranteed issue.

 

[David]

Batman meets The Sopranos....hard to believe this is Colin Farrell, kudos to the man for pulling off the roll. Not usually into DC / Marvel superhero rubbish but this gritty-looking drama is right up my alley. Will definitely be picking up the blu-ray next time I'm around Tower Records.

---