LAS VEGAS, Nevada ? Nevada?s state attorney-general found nothing illegal or criminal in Filipino boxing icon Emmanuel ?Manny? Pacquiao?s controversial split-decision loss to American Timothy Bradley in a welterweight title fight last month in Las Vegas, according to a letter made public on Tuesday.
But Top Rank chief executive Bob Arum branded the findings on the controversial Pacquiao-Bradley world welterweight title fight last June 9 as being shallow.
It was Arum who wrote the attorney-general?s office to look into the highly unpopular 12-round split decision win by Bradley, but the 80-year-old chief of Top Rank, the world?s premier promotional boxing company, said the probe did not cover all bases.
Interviews with the referee of the June 9 fight, two Nevada Gaming Control Board officials and state Athletic Commission Director Keith Kizer turned up no evidence of wrongdoing, state Attorney-General Catherine Cortez Masto said in the letter to Arum.
Arum manages both fighters.
He sought an inquiry on June 11, telling Masto he hoped it would ?show the world that there were no improprieties.?
?Displeasure with the subjective decisions of sporting officials is not a sufficient basis for this office to initiate a criminal investigation,? Masto?s letter said. ?There do not appear to be any facts or evidence to indicate that a criminal violation occurred.?
Masto?s aide Jennifer Lopez issued a statement calling the matter closed.
The attorney-general?s office said there was nothing wrong and dubious with the manner with which the three Nevada judges ? CJ Ross, Duane Ford, and Jerry Roth ? scored the fight. Ross and Ford saw it 115-113 for Bradley, while Roth had it for Pacquiao, 115-113.
The decision was booed by the ringside crowd at the MGM Grand Arena, drew a video review by the World Boxing Organization (WBO), and resulted in a call by Pacquiao for a rematch.
A five-judge panel assembled by the WBO championship committee unanimously favored the Filipino fighter in a review.
However, the WBO can?t overturn the result of the fight.
?I?m happy that the attorney general did some investigating, but there?s a tremendous gap,? Arum told Steve Carp of the Las Vegas Review-Journal from Los Angeles, where he was attending a promotional gig featuring Nonito Donaire.
?Why didn?t they interview the judges? They interview the referee (Robert Byrd), and he wasn?t the problem,? explained Arum.
?I?m not sure this brings closure. I would feel a lot better if they had interviewed the judges. But it?s her investigation, not mine,? added Arum, referring to the findings of Masto.
The Puerto Rico-based WBO, which supervised the fight in partnership with the Nevada State Athletic Commission, had reviewed the fight and later ruled that Pacquiao should have been awarded the verdict.
Meanwhile, Pacquiao could not be contacted for comment as he is vacationing in Jerusalem with his family.
But just before Pacquiao left, he had made it clear that he has decided to move on and look forward to his comeback fight set for November 10 against an opponent yet to be named.
Being eyed are a rematch with Bradley, a fourth fight with Juan Manuel Marquez, or a second meeting with Miguel Cotto.
Pacquiao, who turns 34 in December, is expected to make a decision on this when he gets back from his European vacation by the middle of this month.
