In and of itself, that isn't conclusive of any wrong doing. My knowledge on how the relationship is governed isn't great but it could be a simple case of Al Haymon, as his agent, accepting the payment before passing it on this client.
It's also worth pointing out that the above reflects company's. Irrespective of their name, it is not proof that the payment was made by Al Haymon. Companies have their own legal identity: they would need to prove the company is shell and that Al Haymon is pulling the strings.
It's also worth pointing out that the above reflects company's. Irrespective of their name, it is not proof that the payment was made by Al Haymon. Companies have their own legal identity: they would need to prove the company is shell and that Al Haymon is pulling the strings.
Comment