Related cases:
- ST 2016_03 DFSNZ vs Karl Murray
December 20, 2016 - CAS 2017_A_4937 DFSNZ vs Karl Murray
December 15, 2017 - ST 2017_02 DFSNZ vs Karl Murray - Decision on Jurisdiction
March 14, 2018 - ST 2017_02 DFSNZ vs Karl Murray - Decision on Sanction
May 8, 2018
Previously the New Zealand cyclist Karl Murray was sanctioned on 8 April 2014 by the New Caledonian Anti-Doping Commission for 2 years after he tested positive for the prohibited substances Nandrolone and Testosterone. The UCI became aware of the sanction in early 2015, adopted this sanction with worldwide effect and it was recognised by Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ).
Before the Athlete's sanction ended on 7 April 2016 DFSNZ alleged the Athlete for breaching the ineligiblility. The violaton of sanction (case 2016_03) was initially rejected by the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand on 20 December 2016. However when appealed by DFSNZ in January 2017 the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ultimately decided on 15 December 2017 to re-impose the 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete restarted on 15 December 2017.
During the appeal proceedings with CAS in 2017 DFSNZ reported in May 2017 a new anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete (case 2017_02) after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Clenbuterol. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand.
The Athlete argued that during the Doping Control in March 2017 there were departures of the ISTI. He asserted that he was wrongly deprived of his right to have a representative present during the sample collection process. Also he was not given the opportunity to select a sample collection beaker and instead was provided with an unsealed collection beaker chosen by the Doping Control Officer (DCO).
The Tribunal observed that there was a direct conflict of evidence on several issues between the Athlete’s support person, and the DCO and the testing process chaperone.
The Tribunal considered objectively the evidence in this matter and concluded that it is comfortably satisfied that the appropriate process was followed during the sample collection process and that the Athlete committed the anti-doping rule violation.
In this case the pending CAS Award against the Athlete was not yet released (CAS 2017/A/4937, rendered 15 December 2017). Accordingly the Tribunal decided on 13 October 2017 to adjourn the proceedings in order to rule about a sanction after the release of the CAS Award.
The decision from the Sport Tribunal about the appropriate sanction for the Athlete’s second anti-doping violation is ultimately rendered on 8 May 2018.
