Conor Benn releases explosive statement on ‘my truth’ in a bizarre twist to his doping saga

By James On Feb 28, 2023

Conor Benn has insisted it was never his idea to blame eggs for his failed drug tests in a bizarre twist to his doping saga.

The World Boxing Council last week allowed the 26-year-old to return to his rankings in a verdict that was met with disbelief after its investigation found there was “no conclusive evidence” Benn deliberately ingested clomiphene.

His findings, which have since sparked further scrutiny from both his own research and Benn’s, went on to say that the wrestler’s consumption of eggs “proposed a reasonable explanation” for how the testosterone-boosting substance got into separate samples collected. by the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association in July and September.

However, Benn, who is still facing the possibility of a two-year ban pending the outcome of a separate investigation by UK Anti-Doping, has now issued a lengthy statement claiming that the eggs were never part of his defense.

While he says that the thrust of his legal team’s work was aimed at debunking “fundamental flaws” in testing procedures at an anonymous lab – an argument that was firmly rejected by the WBC – the fighter suggested that, in fact, It was the WBC experts themselves who put forward that the contamination of the eggs was probably based on a study of their diet and nutrition.

Conor Benn has insisted that it was never his idea to blame eggs for his failed drug tests.

Benn said: “In my defense before the WBC and the 270-page report provided to them, I have never indicated that I failed any VADA test due to contaminated eggs.”

“As part of their lengthy investigation, the WBC instructed their own experts to review my supplements and diet and concluded that the most likely cause was egg contamination.

“Those experts have seen this problem arise in elite athletes in other sports and I have no reason to question their analysis when it concludes that I am not a cheater.”

“However, I feel that the WBC’s statement prejudiced my defense as it was based on a thorough scientific review of testing procedures which exposed a number of reasons why we believed the results were completely unreliable and proved beyond belief. any reasonable doubt that I am innocent.

The WBC investigation has already thrown up more questions than answers, not least because its timeline indicated it reached a verdict in Benn’s favor just three weeks after receiving key evidence about his diet in early February.

Benn had previously sought to get off the hook by arguing against irregularities in the lab testing of his samples.

Benn reiterated that argument again in his statement on Tuesday, writing: “The report prepared by my legal and scientific team contained an extensive analysis of both tests and concluded that there was clear evidence of fundamental flaws and wrongdoing.

‘As just one example, my sample appears to have come out clear the first three times it was tested. Without explanation, it was retested after nine days and only then did it show a positive result. It should only have been tried once!

It was unclear which of his failed tests Benn was referring to, who quoted anonymous “experts” in writing: “These critical findings were supported by an independent scientific expert who provides accreditation to laboratories, and his opinion was that many problems were so concerning and serious that the laboratory could lose its accreditation.My team will refer the issues to the appropriate accreditation body so they can make their own determination.

Benn has issued a lengthy statement stating that eggs were never part of his defense.

Benn previously sought to get off the hook by arguing against irregularities in the lab testing of his samples.

“For what it’s worth, and contrary to media speculation at the time, I requested that the B samples be tested as soon as possible. Because of the importance of trying to get to the bottom of what had happened, I arranged for a female scientist to fly across the globe to attend the testing procedure in person (as is allowed under the rules) and, unbelievably, she wasn’t even allowed to be there. in the room when the test results came in. How about that transparency?

“I have been informed that this is a significant violation of the rights of an athlete and if it had been necessary to go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in this case to prove my innocence, that would only have meant that the test results would be disregarded.”

He continued: ‘For what it’s worth, and contrary to media speculation at the time, I requested that the B samples be tested as soon as possible. Because of the importance of trying to get to the bottom of what had happened, I arranged for a female scientist to fly across the globe to attend the testing procedure in person (as is allowed under the rules) and, unbelievably, she wasn’t even allowed to be there. in the room when the test results came in. How about that transparency?

Benn went on to affirm his belief that clomiphene “was never in my system”, adding: “I was told it is something that is supposed to stay in the body for months, and yet just a week after failing a VADA test, I passed a UKAD test.

“I have never failed any type of anti-doping test before and I passed multiple tests with UKAD and VADA very close to the two tests that produced adverse results. This adds further proof to my belief that the results were test errors.

Despite Benn’s bullish claims, and indeed the WBC’s contribution to the situation, the welterweight still faces severe scrutiny and an uncertain future.

Sportsmail reported last week that UKAD and the British Boxing Board of Control have scope to further explore the matter under their rules.

While the two positives were carried out by VADA, the complex case remains within UKAD’s jurisdiction. Under UKAD rules, there are 11 areas in which an athlete can commit an anti-doping violation and it is understood that Benn’s case could fall under its article 2.2.1, on “Use or attempted use by an athlete of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method”. ‘.

In that scenario, its rules point to strict liability, stating: ‘It is the personal duty of each athlete to ensure that no prohibited substance enters their body… Consequently, it is not necessary to demonstrate intent, fault, negligence or knowing use. on the athlete’s part to establish an anti-doping rule violation.’

Crucially, the WBC applied a different standard on the issue of intent, writing in its controversial statement last Wednesday that “there was no conclusive evidence that Mr. Benn knowingly or intentionally ingested clomiphene.”

Benn (left) still faces the possibility of a two-year ban pending the outcome of a separate investigation by UK Anti-Doping.

Anti-doping sources say that while UKAD would not have to prove intent, they would possibly have to bear the burden of having to disprove that the eggs could cause Benn’s positive tests. To that end, it will be noted that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs says that clomiphene is not licensed for use in animals in the UK.

If UKAD ultimately charges Benn and finds him guilty, the ban for a first offense would be up to two years.

British Boxing Board general secretary Robert Smith previously noted the lack of cooperation from Benn’s team in their efforts to secure the evidence they shared with the WBC investigation, whose mandate was limited simply to whether he could return to your classification. .

In response to the WBC’s announcement on Wednesday, Smith wrote: “The UK Anti-Doping Rules make clear what conduct constitutes an Anti-Doping Rule Violation as defined in those rules (and the World Anti-Doping Code) and specifically states the circumstances in which such breaches may be committed by way of strict liability.’