AAA 2017 No. 01 17 0003 6197 USADA vs Jeffrey Brown

Related cases:

  • AAA 2017 No. 01 17 0004 0880 USADA vs Alberto Salazar
    September 30, 2019
  • CAS 2019_A_6530 Jeffrey Brown vs USADA | Alberto Salazar vs USADA
    September 15, 2021


Dr. Jeffrey Brown is a physician and a consultant from 2009-2012 for the Nike Oregon Project (NOP), the NOP Athletes and Mr. Alberto Salazar, the Head Coach of the NOP.

In March 2017 the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has reported multiple anti-doping rule violations against Dr. Brown including aggravating circumstances:

(1) Trafficking and attempted trafficking of testosterone and prohibited intravenous (IV) infusions.
(2) Administration and/or attempted administration of testosterone and prohibited IV infusions.
(3) Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up and other complicity involving one or more anti-doping rule violations and/or attempted anti-doping rule violations. (Complicity).
(4) Tampering and/or attempted Tampering with L-carnitine records since 31 March 2017.

Also charged is Mr. Alberto Salazar the Head Coach of the Nike Oregon Project. Here USADA reported multiple anti-doping rule violations against Mr Salazar for Possession, Trafficking, Administration, Complicity and Tampering.

These charges against Dr. Brown generally involve the prescription of testosterone by Dr. Brown to Mr. Salazar, Dr. Brown’s involvement in a testosterone experiment conducted at the NOP facilities in June and July, 2009 (the Testosterone Experiment), Dr. Brown’s administration of L-carnitine infusions in 2011 and 2012, and actions taken by Dr. Brown and his counsel in connection with the investigation and adjudication of the foregoing claims.

After notification Dr. Brown filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Tribunal of the American Arbitration Association (AAA). In this case against Dr. Brown the Panel has reviewed and examined the testimony from 27 witnesses over six days and the submission of more than 2,000 exhibits, consisting of more than 10,000 pages. The pre- and post- hearing briefs totaled 614 pages, with USADA’s pre-hearing brief alone totaling 392 pages.

The Panel finds that there was no trafficking violation committed by Dr. Brown due to there was no evidence that he provided prescribed Testosterone to Mr. Salazar, knowing it would be used in the Testosterone Experiment. In the matter of the Possession charge the Panel holds that there is no evidence that Dr. Brown intentionally aided or assisted Mr. Salazar in his possession of Testosterone.
However regarding the charge of Complicity the Panel establish that when Dr. Brown became aware of the experiment, he took credit for conducting the experiment and actively encouraged Salazar to continue applying Testosterone on his sons and share the results with him.

The Panel finds that there is no evidence that Dr. Brown allegedly trafficked in (over-limit) L-carnite infusion in excess of 100 mL. Regarding the Administration charge the Panel concludes that Dr. Brown administered infusions to the Athlete Magness but is not convinced by the evidence that infusions in excess of 100 mL were given to other NOP Athletes.

In the matter of the Tampering charge the Panel finds that USADA has proven to the comfortable satisfaction of the Panel that Dr. Brown committed a tampering violation with regard to his L-carnitine infusion-related records of the NOP Athletes. Finally the Panel is not convinced that Dr. Brown’s conduct in this arbitration proceeding improperly impacted the doping control process.

The Panel concludes that Dr. Brown had committed multiple anti-doping rule violations without aggravating circumstances in the determination of the sanction against him.
On the basis of the foregoing facts, legal analysis, and conclusions of fact, the Panel decides on 30 September 2019:

1.) Respondent has committed anti-doping rule violations under Articles 2.5, 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9 of the World Anti-Doping Code
2.) Respondent has not met his burden of proof to qualify for a reduction in the length of his sanction;
3.) Therefore the Panel imposes a period of Ineligibility, with all of its attendant effects, of 4 years, starting from the date of this award through and to the date four years thereafter.
4.) The parties shall each bear their own attorney’s fees and costs associated with this arbitration;
5.) The administrative fees and expenses of the American Arbitration Association, and the compensation and expenses of the arbitrators and the Panel, shall be borne entirely by USADA and the United States Olympic Committee;
6.) This Award shall be in full and final resolution of all claims and counterclaims submitted to this Arbitration.
7.) (…)

Original document

Parameters

Legal Source
National Decisions
Date
30 September 2019
Arbitrator
Benz, Jeffrey G.
Muedeking, Mark
Whiterspoon, Carolyn
Original Source
United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)
Country
United States of America
Language
English
ADRV
Administration / attempted administration
Complicity
Possession
Tampering / attempted tampering
Trafficking / attempted trafficking
Legal Terms
Burdens and standards of proof
Circumstantial evidence
Digital evidence / information
Multiple violations
Sport/IFs
Athletics (WA) - World Athletics
Other organisations
United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)
Doping classes
M2. Chemical And Physical Manipulation
S1. Anabolic Agents
Substances
Testosterone
Medical terms
Intravenous infusions
Legitimate Medical Treatment
Various
Athlete support personnel
Doping control
Lack of cooperation / obstruction
Document type
Pdf file
Date generated
3 October 2019
Date of last modification
27 October 2021
Category
  • Legal Source
  • Education
  • Science
  • Statistics
  • History
Country & language
  • Country
  • Language
Other filters
  • ADRV
  • Legal Terms
  • Sport/IFs
  • Other organisations
  • Laboratories
  • Analytical aspects
  • Doping classes
  • Substances
  • Medical terms
  • Various
  • Version
  • Document category
  • Document type
Publication period
Origin