[ad_1]
Campbell’s legal representatives, Nunes Scholefield Deleon & Co, a Jamaican law firm, said in statement that “he was not properly notified by JADCO” with regards to incident where he did not provide the sample, and that there were “several mitigatory factors supported by evidence which were not challenged by JADCO and which ought to have militated against the imposition of the maximum penalty”. The statement also emphasised that Campbell has “to date never returned an adverse analytical finding for banned substances”.
“Mr John Campbell and his legal team are very disappointed with the ruling of the Independent Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel,” the statement, which was put up on the West Indies Players’ Association (WIPA) website, read. “Mr Campbell has been a clean athlete throughout his outstanding career as a batsman and he remains committed to clean sport…
“The allegation concerned refusing or failing to submit to sample collection after proper notification pursuant to Article 2.3 of the JADCO Anti-Doping Rules. Our client has, to date, never returned an adverse analytical finding for banned substances…
“Mr Campbell’s position was that he was not properly notified by JADCO. There were several breaches by JADCO of the mandatory International Standards for Testing and Investigations in respect of the notification of the athlete which, in our view, were not adequately addressed by the Panel.
“Additionally, there were several mitigatory factors supported by evidence which were not challenged by JADCO and which ought to have militated against the imposition of the maximum penalty, even if the Panel found that the athlete committed a violation…
“Our client will therefore at this time consider exercising his right of appeal … and will make a decision shortly.”
[ad_2]
Source link
