Conor McGregor Megathread *Mod Warning in OP Updated 20th April*

Well, one thing I think we can all be quite certain on is that McGregor's appeal will be played out on his social media via rantings, not in an actual judicial setting. How desperate are some folks to try sully the jury's civil trial verdict that they'd be wanting CCTV footage released , as if this somehow disqualifies the jury's verdict, the same jury that actually did see the CCTV footage…. along with hearing all the other evidence

I believe McGregor is “playing at being Trump” in terms of his public lambasting of the court and the verdict- different country, different rules and certainly different outcomes- he may yet regret his behaviour - I’m hoping a spell in jail for contempt is open to the judge because he certainly deserves that

What's the actual legal status of the CCTV footage?

It must have been released by gardai/DPP for the civil trial. If a copy was made for both sides(I don't know which side had it originally) who owns those copies now?

It was originally the property of the hotel.

Ordinarily control of use/copying of footage/photographs is very tight for criminal case, not so much for civil trials.

Can the judge legally limit the publication of the CCTV?

I have no interest in seeing footage; a short clip without full context clip is never a good starting point for anything.

As odd as this sounds I don't want him going to jail for contempt. He'd be out in no time and it would be a badge of honour for him and his criminsl pals. He'd make himself out to be harder than he already thinks he for doing "time". Then when he gets out there would be party of the century to welcome him home Sopranos style.

Would impact his travel to the US you would think

Correct me if I’m wrong but I haven’t seen reports of him actually being in America for some time now - I’m wondering is he already experiencing some issues in obtaining a relevant visa - I wouldn’t be surprised if he was

let’s hope the court puts an end to this intimidation and harassment, or at least tries to put an end to it.

It can't. Cos as long as his scrote army still believe he's "the greatest" they'll do their scrote thing. Realistically she should get 10 or 20 times what she got: 2.5 - 5 million so she could move. Not for one moment saying she should have to move. She's the victim. But he's going to continue to do his thing (Deny and attempt to profit from it and victim shame her via his proxies/businesses) and his scrote fanbase will continue to do their thing.

Well no. It would only be compelling if it showed what did or did not happen inside the penthouse bedroom. All it can really show is the state of the parties at that time.

Having a "beyond reasonable doubt" standard of proof at a civil trial would not be practical. You could have a civil dispute with your neighbour about where your garden ends and where his starts. If you say it is at line A but your neighbour says it is at line B. It ends up in court where you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you are correct ………. but your neighbour cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is correct. Nothing would get decided. Whereas in a criminal trial you cannot convict based on a "more likely than not" standard.

I saw some gobsh!te on twitter (maybe it was linked from this thread as I'm not on twitter) who had a picture of the victim leaving the trial side by side with a picture of McGregors missus lying on a beach, to denigrates the victim's looks, and trying to say that that somehow proved he didn't do what he did.

Which, apart from being wholly irrelevant to anything, completely and blindly ignored the fact that the perpetrator admitted his own behaviour vis-a-vis meeting up with the victim, organising a penthouse to bring her back to, and then claiming he had consensual sex with her.

as I posted earlier, i have misgivings on the entire thing… i dont see how from the evidence presented a decision could be made and in general terms this civil court thing doesn't sit right with me

In fairness, you don't have all the evidence. None of us not involved in the case (Including the jury) do. That's what the jury is there for: To represent us. It is not the position of the court to release this to the entire world and get their/our verdict.

One cannot expect her life to be ruined even more because of curiosity

Edited as I incorrectly quoted wrong post. Sincerest apologies to originally quoted poster

Seems the floodgates have opened according to the Irish Independent