Conor Benn has slammed the ‘serious and troubling’ testing procedures in a statement where he’s given his version of events amid his failed doping tests.
The British Boxing Board of Control prohibited his planned fight against Chris Eubank Jr from taking place after Benn twice registered positive results for the banned substance clomifene in VADA (Voluntary Anti-Doping Association) drugs tests last year.
There have been two separate investigations into the tests – one by the WBC sanctioning body and one by the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBoC)/UKAD (UK Anti-Doping).
Benn’s representatives have co-operated with the WBC investigation by providing them with a 270-page document fighting his case.
The World Boxing Council reinstated Benn into their welterweight world rankings and revealed he will face no punishment last week.
It was ruled that there is ‘no conclusive evidence’ he intentionally or knowingly ingested clomifene and accepted Benn’s ‘highly-elevated consumption of eggs’ as a ‘reasonable explanation’ for positive tests.
In light of the decision, talkSPORT’s Simon Jordan called on the son of former middleweight champion Nigel Benn to prove his innocence to the BBBoC.
But in a lengthy statement on his social media, Benn criticised the testing procedures, claiming that he believes the banned substance was never in his system at all, while also slamming the BBBoC for treating him with ‘utter contempt’ during the process.
Benn said: “The WBC have declared me innocent of being a drugs cheat. I am grateful for the ultimate finding. It was the right decision and it was the only one I was willing to accept … My only frustration is that the manner in which I’ve been cleared has seemed to create further questions and add further fuel to baseless negative speculation.
“In my defence to the WBC and the 270-page report provided to them, at no point did I indicate that I failed any VADA tests because of contaminated eggs.”
He added: “However, I feel like the WBC statement did a disservice to my defence which was based upon a comprehensive scientific review of the testing procedures, which set out a number of reasons why we believed the results were completely unreliable, and proved beyond any reasonable doubt that I am innocent.
“The report prepared by my science and legal team contained extensive analysis of both tests and concluded that there was clear evidence of fundamental flaws and irregularities.
“By way of just one example, my sample appears to have come back clear the first three times it was tested. Without explanation, it was retested again after nine days and only then did it show a trace positive result. It should only have been tested once!”
The statement added: “These critical findings were endorsed by an independent expert scientist who provides accreditation to laboratories, and his opinion was that the many issues were so troubling and serious that the lab could lose its accreditation. My team will be referring the issues to the relevant accrediting body so it can make its own determination.
“For what it’s worth, and contrary to the media speculation at the time, I requested the B samples be tested at the earliest opportunity. Because of the importance of trying to get to the bottom of what had happened I arranged for a scientist to fly across the world to attend the testing procedure in person (as you’re allowed to do under the rules) and unbelievably she was not even allowed to be in the room when the test results came through. How’s that for transparency?
“I have been advised that’s a major breach of an athlete’s rights and had it been necessary to go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport on this case to prove my innocence, that alone would have meant the test results were dismissed.”
Benn continued: “I am convinced the substance was never in my system and I certainly never knowingly ingested.
“I am told it’s something that supposedly stays in the body for months, and yet barely a week after failing a VADA test, I passed a UKAD test.
“I have never previously failed any kind of anti-doping test, and passed multiple tests with both UKAD and VADA in close proximity to the two tests that returned adverse findings. This adds further proof to my belief that the findings were testing errors.”
On the BBBoC, Benn said: “For those who have gave me their unwavering support I will forever be grateful. For those who said they would wait for a verdict before deciding I was guilty, I appreciate your patience.
“As for the BBBoC, they attacked me publicly and privately during the most difficult time of my life, treating me with utter contempt and without any consideration for fair process or my mental state.”
