In July 2013 the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Asafa Powell after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance oxilofrine (methylsynephrine).

After notification the Athlete admitted the violation and accepted a provisional suspension. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Jamaica Anti-Doping (JAD) Disciplinary Panel.
The Athlete stated that he used the supplement Epiphany D1, which contained the prohibited substance and provided by his physical therapist, and asserted that he checked the ingredients of his supplements before using.

The Panel considers that the Athlete had no intention to enhance his sport performance but he also acted with fault and negligence. Therefore the JAD Disciplinary Panel decides on 1 May 2014 to impose a 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 21 June 2013 until 20 December 2014.

Related cases:
JADCO 2013 JADCO vs Dominique Blake
July 8, 2013
JADCO 2013 JADCO vs Dominique Blake – Appeal 1
September 11, 2013
CAS 2013_A_3361 Dominique Blake JADCO
May 2, 2014

The Jamaican Athlete Donique Blake filed a new appeal with the Jamaica Anti-Doping (JAD) Appeal Tribunal after the JAD Disciplinary Panel imposed a 6 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete on 8 July 2013, due to she tested positive for methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine), and hereafter the JAD Appeals Tribunal dismissed her appeal on 11 September 2013.

The Athlete argued that there are grounds for a reduced sanction and that the imposed 6 year period of ineligibility should be between 1-4 years.
The Tribunal reviewed the statements, the evidence and the previous decisions in this case and concludes that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction and that a sanction between 4-6 years is appropriate.
Therefore on 1 October 2013 the JAD Appeals Tribunal dismiss the Athlete’s second appeal but decides to uphold the Athlete’s request to start the period of ineligibility on 24 July 2012 instead of 13 June 2013.

Related cases:
JADCO 2013 JADCO vs Dominique Blake
July 8, 2013
JADCO 2013 Dominique Blake vs JADCO – Appeal 2
October 1, 2013
CAS 2013_A_3361 Dominique Blake JADCO
May 2, 2014

On 8 July 2013 the Jamaica Anti-Doping (JAD) Disciplinary Panel decides to impose a 6 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete Dominique Blake as second violation after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine).

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the decision of the JAD Disciplinary Panel with the JAD Appeals Tribunal.
The Athlete argued that she had no intention to enhance her performance; she acted with no significant negligence; and she provided corroborating evidence to the Panel.

The JAD Appeals Tribunal decides on 11 September 2013 to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal and to uphold the decision of the JAC Disciplinary Panel of 8 July 2013.

Related cases:
JADCO 2013 JADCO vs Dominique Blake – Appeal 1
September 11, 2013
JADCO 2013 Dominique Blake vs JADCO – Appeal 2
October 1, 2013
CAS 2013_A_3361 Dominique Blake JADCO
May 2, 2014

In August 2012 the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Dominique Blake after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine).

The Athlete admitted the violation and stated she used a supplement, recommended by her mentor, which contained geranium and did not read the warning on the label before using the product.
The Panel concluded that the Athlete and her mentor turned a “blind eye” to the ingredients in the product she used. They didn’t pay attention to the warning on the webshop and she failed to mention the product on the Doping Control Form.
Due to this is the Athlete’s second violation - first violation in 2006 (efedrine) - the Jamaica Anti-Doping (JAD) Disciplinary Panel decides on 8 July 2013 to impose a 6 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on 13 June 2013.

In July 2012 the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Ricardo Cunningham after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance pseudoephedrine.
After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Jamaica Anti-Doping (JAD) Disciplinary Panel.

The Athlete stated that he suffered from the flu, congestion, cough and running nose and therefore used “over the counter” medication such as Cetamol, Panadol and DPH.
Hereafter the Athlete consulted a medical doctor who diagnosed that, due to the Athlete’s condition, his tonsils were enlarged and inflamed. Analysis of the Athlete’s medication showed that Cetamol and DPH contained the prohibited substance pseudoephendrine.

The Panel considers the circumstances and concludes that the Athlete had no intention to enlarge his sport performance. Therefore the JAD Disciplinary Panel decides on 18 February 2013 to reprimand the Athlete without a period of inelgibibility.

In June 2011 the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Steve Mullings after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance furosemide.
After notification the Athlete waived his right to attend the hearing of the Jamaica Anti-Doping (JAD) Disciplinary Panel and was there only represented by his attorneys.
Because this is his second violation, the JAD Disciplinary Panel decides on 21 November 2011 to impose a lifetime period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

Related case:
JADCO 2011 JADCO vs Simone Forbes
May 1, 2011

On 1 May 2011 the Jamaica Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel decided to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete Simone Forbes after she tested positive for the prohibited substance clomiphene.

In April 2011 the Athlete appealed the JAD Disciplinary Panel Decision with the JAD Appeals Tribunal. The Athlete argued that the use of the medication was for her medical condition, precribed by her doctor and without intention to enhance her sport performance. In support three persons gave positive affidavits about the Athlete.

The Appeals Tribunal considers that the Athlete had no intention to enhance her performance; the fact that she failed to mention the medication on her Doping Control Form; and also failed to inform her team doctor about her medical treatment.
Due to her negligence the JAD Appeals Tribunal decides to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal and to uphold the decision of the JAD Disciplinary Panel of 1 May 2011.

Related case:
JADCO 2011 Simone Forbes vs JADCO – Appeal
June 16, 2011

In April 2011 the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Simone Forbes after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance clomiphene. After notification JADCO orderered a provisional suspension. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence, waived her right to to request the B sample analysis and was heard for the Jamaica Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel.

The Athlete stated that she suffered from a medical condition, which was treated with prescribed medication and didn’t know it contained a prohibited substance. Her medical doctor sustained the Athlete’s medical condition and that he administered the medication without intention to enhance her sport performance.

The JAD Disciplinary Panel considers the circumstances and decides on 1 May 2011 to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 18 April 2011.

In July 2009 the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against:
- the Athlete Troy Gauntlett, after his sample tested positive for the prohibited susbstance methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine); and
- the Athlete Jaeson Magnus after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis.

In spite of JADCO’s request for an adjournment the Athlete’s wanted to be heard for the Jamaica Anti-Doping (JAD) Disciplinary Panel.
The Athlete Troy Gauntlett admitted he used a supplement Animal Pak before the competition and stated that didn’t know it contained a prohibited substance. He also mentioned the supplement on the Doping Control Form.
The Athlete Jaeson Magnus admitted he smoked marijuana shortly before the competition.

The JAD Disciplinary Panel decides on 16 September 2009 to impose a reprimand on both Athlete’s and imposed on the Athlete Troy Gauntlett a 3 month period of ineligibility, starting on the date of the decision.

Facts
The French University Sport Federation (Fédération Française du Sport Universitaire, FFSU) charges respondent M04 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a ski event on March 23, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent had used cannabis two days before the doping control. He had celebrated his birthday among friends. There was no intention to enhance performances.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of four months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFSU or other related French sport federations.
2. The decision will start on the date of the notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.