CAS 2003/A/484 Kicker Vencill vs USADA
Related documents:
- AAA No. 30 190 00291 03 USADA vs Kicker Vencill
July 24, 2003 - CAS 2003_A_484 Kicker Vencill vs USADA - Interim award
November 18, 2003 - USADA - Supplement 411 - Kicker Vencill, Introduction Video
May 24, 2012
On 23 June 2003 the North American Court of Arbitration (NACAS) decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the American swimmer Kicker Vencill after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).
Hereafter in July 2003 the Athlete appealed the NACAS decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The Athlete requested for a reduced sanction on the basis of No Significant Fault or Negligence.
The Athlete argued a number of issues in support of his appeal, ranging from:
- questions concerning the chain of custody of his sample;
- alleged violations of his right to be present for the testing of his B sample;
- supposed inaccuracies in the results reported by the UCLA Lab; and
- allegations to the effect that the low concentration of 19-norandrosterone found in the athlete's sample is consistent with endogenous production as opposed to exogenoμs administration or ingestion of a prohibited substance.
The Panel finds that there is no question that the Athlete is guilty of committing an anti-doping rule violation and he failed to establish that the chain of custody of his sample was anything other than intact. Further the Panel concludes that the laboratory analysis was correctly conducted, the Athlete’s samples had not deteriorated or been contaminated and the proper laboratory procedures had been followed.
The Panel accepts that the violation was not intentional and that laboratory analysis revealed that the supplement in question was contaminated. However the Athlete showed also a total disregard of his positive duty to ensure that no prohibited substance enters his body.
As a result the Panel holds that the Athlete’s Fault or Negligence in the circumstances is exceptionally significant in relation to the doping violation.
Therefore the of Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 11 March 2004 that:
1.) The jurisriction of the CAS is affirmed;
2.) The appeal filed by Mr. Vencill on 14 July 2003 is dismissed;
3.) Save for the applicable period of ineligibility as specified in paragraph 4 below, the decision in this matter issued by the North American Court of Arbitration for Sport Panel dated 23 June 2003 is upheld;
4.) Kicker Vencill shall be declared ineligible for competition for two years commencing as of 22 May 2003:
5.) The Court Office fee of CHF 500 already paid by Mr. Vencill shall be retained by the CAS;
6.) Each party shall bear its own costs.
