Apparently, such was not the case according to Nevada’s attorney general.
Nevada attorney general Catherine Cortez Matso, after investigating the controversial decision, declared that there was no crime involved in the fight’s result.
"After conducting an initial investigation, there do not appear to be any facts or evidence to indicate that a criminal violation occurred," Cortez wrote in a letter explaining her findings on the case, as reported today by RingTV.com’s Lem Satterfield.
"As of this date, no one has presented any facts or evidence to indicate a crime has been committed by anyone involved in the Bradley/Pacquiao fight," she added.
Cortez conducted an investigation of the Pacquiao-Bradley fight at the behest of Top Rank chief Bob Arum. In a letter addressed to Cortez, the ageless promoter asked the attorney general to look into allegations of betting improprieties, among other things.
“Although I do not believe that to be the case,” Arum added in the letter, referring to the alleged betting irregularities.
Pacquiao yielded his WBO welterweight title to Bradley last June 10 at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas in a fight where the Filipino appeared to dominate his challenger.
But judges C.J. Ross and Duane Ford awarded the fight to Bradley, 115-113. Judge Jerry Roth had Pacquiao winning 115-113 in his scorecard, but even that is disputable since Pacquiao appeared to have won more rounds.
The result was met by criticism from the boxing community and the public, with some branding it as one of the worst decisions in boxing history.
The WBO recently conducted a review of the fight, and its five-man panel found Pacquiao winning by scores of 117-111, 117-111, 118-110, 116-112, and 115-113. The sanctioning organization, however, said it cannot change the official result.
WBO President Francisco "Paco" Valcarcel said "the only thing that we can do is authorize a rematch."
Pacquiao has a rematch clause in his contract, but it is still uncertain whether he will exercise it.
