Is Dillian Whyte suing Boxingscene?

[Citizen Koba]

No he is suing Thomas Hauser and whoever leaked the confidential information to him from the UKAD or laboratory testing facility.

Is this actually happening? I hadn't seen a story. But yeah, that was my first instinct - that UKAD and BBBoC - or possibly the testing labs - should be in the firing line for allowing the story to leak.

Not sure if Hauser can be sued in this particular instance since he wouldn't have been bound by any confidentiality and AFAIK didn't report anything innaccurate... at least, not directly pertaining to Whyte's test (although his claim that under VADA the opponent is immediately informed of failed tests was not accurate I believe)

https://vada-testing.org/downloads/policies/vada_results_management_policy_v10-26-12.pdf

[LacedUp]

Amongst all of the corruption in Boxing, a man pisses dirty and is then cleared of any wrong doing. We are expected to take his word that he is clean and it was not his fault. He gave the same exact speeches the previous time he got caught red-handed and served a ban. He still to this day denies the first time he was juicing, even though it was proven beyond doubt. So who are we to believe? The whole thing stinks.

What is the difference between this and Fury's case? Except Whyte didn't get a ban.

[Clegg]

Doubtful

Whyte and Hearn want to move along and have it forgotten, lawsuits don't achieve that

[LacedUp]

Is this actually happening? I hadn't seen a story. But yeah, that was my first instinct - that UKAD and BBBoC - or possibly the testing labs - should be in the firing line for allowing the story to leak.

Not sure if Hauser can be sued in this artocular instance since he wouldn't have been bound by any confidentiality and AFAIK didn't report anything innaccurate.

Even if the source is incorrect, any publisher that re-publishes can be sued on similar grounds.

[Ray*]

Amongst all of the corruption in Boxing, a man pisses dirty and is then cleared of any wrong doing. We are expected to take his word that he is clean and it was not his fault. He gave the same exact speeches the previous time he got caught red-handed and served a ban. He still to this day denies the first time he was juicing, even though it was proven beyond doubt. So who are we to believe? The whole thing stinks.

Totally agree with you, Just like Tyson Fury I never believed him till today.

[W1LL]

What is the difference between this and Fury's case? Except Whyte didn't get a ban.

You tell me. If Fury is guilty then so is Whyte?

[LacedUp]

You tell me. If Fury is guilty then so is Whyte?

You are very quick to convict Whyte despite literally every single piece of evidence showing he's innocent.

Why didn't you do the same to Fury? Who actually received a ban from UKAD. Why?

Because you're a pathetic hater.

[Ray*]

Is this actually happening? I hadn't seen a story. But yeah, that was my first instinct - that UKAD and BBBoC - or possibly the testing labs - should be in the firing line for allowing the story to leak.

Not sure if Hauser can be sued in this artocular instance since he wouldn't have been bound by any confidentiality and AFAIK didn't report anything innaccurate.

Hauser is definitely the name they are going for along with his sources, the WBC didn’t help by using it to push back his mandatory, which is the angle his solicitors are going for, which was Hauser costed him a multimillion dollar chance at the WBC belt by reporting a confidential information. And based on that he lost his mandatory spot to Fury for another 12 months.

We all know the WBC would still have blocked him anyways from fight Wilder regardless of the adverse findings.

[Zelda]

Did BoxingScene report something wrong?

They tested Whyte, they found small amounts of two banned substances, but they are not going to press any further or ban him. That's basically what the UKAD report is saying.

Whyte is not being cleared in the sense that the news of a positive result was false or nothing ever happened. The only thing could be that it was supposed to be confidential with UKAD but somehow got out. So, Whyte can sue UKAD, or if someone else is involved, for breaching confidentiality but I think Hearn/Whyte must have come to some sort of an agreement that neither side goes any further.

[PotentialToast]

Is this actually happening? I hadn't seen a story. But yeah, that was my first instinct - that UKAD and BBBoC - or possibly the testing labs - should be in the firing line for allowing the story to leak.

Not sure if Hauser can be sued in this particular instance since he wouldn't have been bound by any confidentiality and AFAIK didn't report anything innaccurate... at least, not directly pertaining to Whyte's test (although his claim that under VADA the opponent is immediately informed of failed tests was not accurate I believe)

https://vada-testing.org/downloads/p..._v10-26-12.pdf

You don't have to agree to hold confidential information in confidence to get sued if you blab when you acquired it from a breach. Basically Hauser is getting it and CBS will pay what he can't.