Who’s going to sue Whyte and Hearn for defending themselves?

[ShaneMosleySr]

Eddie Hearn and Dillian Whyte repeatedly say they can’t be anything more than completely vague while defending themselves on the failed drug test issue because of legal reasons.

What legal reasons? They’re going to get sued for defending themselves from accusations? Who’s going to sue them?

It doesn’t make sense.

[Randall Cunning]

I think its Whyte doing the suing.

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

Whyte is going through a legal process with the UKAD and the British Board. He was cleared to fight, but not cleared for the failed drug test. The legal process for that is confidential and Hearn or Whyte saying the wrong thing could cost them.

Not to mention, I believe they fully expect a lawsuit from Yvon Michel and Rivas.

[ShaneMosleySr]

He’s going to sue who exactly and if that’s the case, why would it hurt their case to acknowledge if there was a failed test or not?

I think its Whyte doing the suing.

[sicko]

Oscar Rivas and Yvon Michel are suing for sure and rightfully so! A Lawsuit= Further Investigation which could uncover A LOT OF DIRT!

[kushking]

Eddie Hearn and Dillian Whyte repeatedly say they can’t be anything more than completely vague while defending themselves on the failed drug test issue because of legal reasons.

What legal reasons? They’re going to get sued for defending themselves from accusations? Who’s going to sue them?

It doesn’t make sense.

Whyte is going through a legal process with the UKAD and the British Board. He was cleared to fight, but not cleared for the failed drug test. The legal process for that is confidential and Hearn or Whyte saying the wrong thing could cost them.

Not to mention, I believe they fully expect a lawsuit from Yvon Michel and Rivas.

He’s going to sue who exactly and if that’s the case, why would it hurt their case to acknowledge if there was a failed test or not?

I have done research into this & its been apparent since the very beginning that the real reason they are trying to act like they can't say anything is because they are scared that they will end up digging themselves deeper into a hole if Whyte fails further tests which is entirely possible due to vada taking much longer to test athletes,& they're trying to flip the script & avoid having to answer serious questions in detail.

When baby huey Miller failed his 1st test he was trying to claim innocence,but then he started popping for more drugs & also more tests & went from playing the victim/ race card to suddenly playing the "im sworry I dwid that,feel sworry fwor me"

So from the beginning its been obvious that Hearn literally was willing to hide the truth as long as possible in order to not lose the money he was going to make for this card,he knew it'd likely be Whytes last headlined card & that he could squeeze out a few extra mil as opposed to losing money by canceling the card. So this same dirtbag hearn whom had once called for Canelo to be banned for life, before any investigation had been done,is now trying to spin this as if he wasn't the same exact clown trying to act holier than thou when Canelo got popped with the tiniest amount of a proven food contaminant after Canelo having done vada for many yrs & despite the circumstances matching up perfectly for contamination. The same thing goes for Tony bellend whom was regurgitating everything Hearn said, suddenly hes keeping his dumb trap shut.

Finally this brings me to the absolute most important aspect of all of this: Canelo was retested countless times after dirty tests,& was required by NSAC to submit to a hair follicle test to demonstrate that he hadn't been doping for Clen or other drugs especially before the dirty test. He passed with flying colors but was still given a 6 mo ban by nsac so as to avoid any semblance that the rematch with ggg was on an unfair playing field, partially because in vegas bettors can sue if they lost $ on a boxer with substances in his system.

So this immediately demonstrates how much different the situations are when a fighter is completely as dirty/guilty as can be because he took roids,& when a fighter gets accidentally popped with a known weak contaminant he was unaware of. When a fighter is truly clean they would instantly say they are clean & they would be trying to do anything to clear their name. But instead Whyte is doing the exact opposite as well as UKAD whom shouldve tested his hair soon after it happened,they have avoided it because they are corrupt or spineless incompetents or both.

[Eff Pandas]

I think they are prolonging things to protect themselves as much as possible til ideally for them this turns into a "who cares" type thing when the bad news of the facts of this gets revealed.

If they were 100% clean I think Eddie would be all too anxious to say wait til the news comes out, but this time he's not using key phrases like mentioning that Whyte tested positive for anything at all yet for some weird reason despite no mention of a positive PED result we had to have a special meeting & Whyte had to be cleared to fight. Why did Whyte need to get cleared for anything if he didn't test positive for anabolic steroids.

I'm just rooting on Rivas getting his 0 back by this fight being declared a No Contest + for Whyte to receive a suspension of some sort. If neither of those things happen this situation will be a bigger embarrassment for boxing then its already become.

[Randall Cunning]

He’s going to sue who exactly and if that’s the case, why would it hurt their case to acknowledge if there was a failed test or not?

Hearn said in the first interview when the story broke that Whyte's lawyers were sending getting in touch with journalists, Frank Warrens BT Sport interview from yesterday been taken down. Theres **** going down behind the scenes.

[MASTERBX]

Maybe he can use the race card like canelo and fury and just wait to it all blow over.

[PotentialToast]

Hearn said in the first interview when the story broke that Whyte's lawyers were sending getting in touch with journalists, Frank Warrens BT Sport interview from yesterday been taken down. Theres **** going down behind the scenes.

I noticed this. UKAD must have concluded no risk to Rivas, otherwise he would not have been licenced by BBBC. UKAD must therefore have concluded test consistent with low level contamination and not doping (evidence by timing of other tests). Frank suggested Rivas put at risk which would be defamatory, hence interview pulled.