Benn’s Defence Centred Around Jurisdiction Rather Than Science
- Conor Benn’s Legal Team Appeared Before A Key NADP Hearing On Monday
- The Hearing Reportedly Was Based Around Jurisdiction Rather Than Science
- Benn’s Defence Centres Around UKAD’s Power Over VADA Samples And Benn
According to Mail Sport, the focus of Conor Benn‘s Monday hearing before the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP) was to reach a conclusion on where jurisdiction lies for Benn’s two positive tests.
Benn’s defence is reportedly primarily focused on UK Anti-Doping’s (UKAD) power to rule over the tests.
The son of boxing legend, Nigel Benn, gave up his British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC) licence last October. The argument provided by Mike Morgan, chief lawyer for Benn, centres around UKAD’s ability to rule over samples under VADA testing.
26-year-old Benn passed all UKAD tests and received a favourable ruling in a WBC investigation earlier this year which led to him being reinstated into the welterweight rankings.
The undefeated 147-pounder has presented a defence based on science to the media, one that is NOT the primary defence in Benn’s doping case, legally.
If Benn doesn’t receive a favourable result in Monday’s hearing over jurisdiction, then he will argue that the ‘metabolites of clomifene in his samples were consistent with food contamination rather than oral ingestion of the drug’ at a separate hearing.
Firstly, the former Ring Magazine top 10 will attempt to get off on a technicality over jurisdiction rather than an explanation for the failed tests.
What This Could Mean For Chris Eubank Jr vs Conor Benn
If Benn receives a favourable finding from Monday’s hearing, he will be free to fight in the UK, subject to the obtainment of a licence, and can proceed with his boxing career which has been stalled since last April.
Eddie Hearn, the promoter of Benn, wants to reschedule a British super fight with Chris Eubank Jr for September 23rd at either the Tottenham Hotspur or Wembley Stadium in a DAZN PPV clash.
By NoSmokeSport