Nevada says no crime committed in Bradley/Pacquiao decision
Bob Arum wanted an investigation and he got one — but apparently it wasn’t as thorough as he was hoping. The Nevada attorney general, Catherine Cortez Masto wrote to Arum upon completion of the investigation, “There do not appear to be any facts or evidence to indicate that a criminal violation occurred,” or at least, so far as the state of Nevada could tell. The investigation included a lot of interviewing of referee Robert Byrd, but did not include interviews of any of the judges — Jerry Roth, C.J. Ross, and Duane Ford. As Arum stated, not interviewing the judges was a big mistake on the part of the attorney general’s chief of investigations, Dale Liebherr — and I couldn’t agree more.
Why the hell would you interview the referee to no end only to completely ignore the most vital part — and really only part — of the boxing match’s decision process? The judges are the ones who score the fight and ultimately determine its outcome. The referee is more or less in there just to make sure no one gets hit below the belt or their ear bitten off. It seems odd to me that a state’s attorney general’s office would leave out such a critical part of an investigation regarding the outcome of the boxing match. Maybe the referee was in on the fix, but it’s not like there was a knockdown and the referee called the fight prematurely. The fight went the distance and was decided by the judges — or whomever decided to put the fix in.
There is no doubt in my mind or anyone else’s that this fight was fixed. Bob Arum should be ashamed for trying to pull the wool over our eyes, when it is so obvious what happened that night in Las Vegas. If I’m Pacquiao and I get beat in a split decision where I know I beat the other boxer’s brains in, then I’m certainly not smiling and shaking his hand immediately after the fight is over. The only picture the media would get of me is me punching one of the judges who scored the fight in Bradley’s favor.
The attorney general also issued this statement:
“Displeasure with the subjective decisions of sporting officials is not a sufficient basis for this office to initiate a criminal investigation. Unless evidence beyond mere displeasure if forthcoming, this matter will be considered closed. While there may be strong disagreement with the decision, the exercise of professional judgment by individuals officiating at a sporting event is not by itself a criminal violation.”
It’s almost too convenient for Arum. Pacquiao was happy at the end of the fight, he already had his check in hand for the rematch that was set almost too quickly, and now this; conveniently the attorney general’s office didn’t interview the judges and Arum is “up in arms” about it. Something stinks here and I call bullshit.