Tweet
Steve Mullings Loses Appeal, Banned For Life
Published: Monday March 4, 2013 | 1:39 pm0 Comments
Jamaican steve mullings - File
The Court of Arbitration for Sport has dismissed Jamaican sprinter Steve Mullings appeal against his lifetime ban.
Mullings was banned from athletics by the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission November 22, 2011.
That was his second doping violation.
In 2004, Mullings was sanctioned with a two-year suspension following a positive test for the drug methyltestoterone.
In June 2011, he tested positive for the substance Furosemide and was subsequently given a life ban.
Following the Commission’s ruling, Mullings filed an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport requesting the annulment of the JADCO Disciplinary Panel’s decision.
Mullings argued that there were problems with the 2004 positive test.
He contended that that sample should not be counted as a first sanction for a doping offence.
The sprinter further argued that laboratory results of the 2011 test were unreliable and that the disciplinary proceedings were flawed.
After hearing the appeal, the Court ruled that Mullings did not present any basis to challenge the testing procedure of the 2011 sample.
The panel further said that it did not find the circumstances surrounding the first offence did not warrant the sanction.
It was on that bases Court upheld the lifetime ban.
Published: Monday March 4, 2013 | 1:39 pm0 Comments
Jamaican steve mullings - File
The Court of Arbitration for Sport has dismissed Jamaican sprinter Steve Mullings appeal against his lifetime ban.
Mullings was banned from athletics by the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission November 22, 2011.
That was his second doping violation.
In 2004, Mullings was sanctioned with a two-year suspension following a positive test for the drug methyltestoterone.
In June 2011, he tested positive for the substance Furosemide and was subsequently given a life ban.
Following the Commission’s ruling, Mullings filed an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport requesting the annulment of the JADCO Disciplinary Panel’s decision.
Mullings argued that there were problems with the 2004 positive test.
He contended that that sample should not be counted as a first sanction for a doping offence.
The sprinter further argued that laboratory results of the 2011 test were unreliable and that the disciplinary proceedings were flawed.
After hearing the appeal, the Court ruled that Mullings did not present any basis to challenge the testing procedure of the 2011 sample.
The panel further said that it did not find the circumstances surrounding the first offence did not warrant the sanction.
It was on that bases Court upheld the lifetime ban.
Comment