Attorneys representing Jamaican squash player Julian Morrison have filed a formal application requesting that Catherine Minto, Chair of the Independent Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel, recuse herself from the ongoing hearing concerning an alleged anti-doping violation. The application, filed by Dr. Emir Crowne, Mr. Matthew Gayle, and Mr. Sayeed Bernard, on Monday, September 2, argues that Minto’s prior extensive working relationship with Kings Counsel Ian Wilkinson, who is representing the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) in the matter, presents a potential conflict of interest.

The legal team’s concerns are rooted in the principle of impartiality, as outlined in WADA’s International Standard for Results Management. This standard mandates that members of hearing panels must be free from any actual or potential conflicts of interest to ensure a fair and unbiased adjudication process.

According to the standard, “Upon appointment to a hearing panel, each hearing panel member shall sign a declaration that there are no facts or circumstances known to him/her which might call into question their impartiality in the eyes of any of the parties, other than any circumstances disclosed in the declaration…”

Morrison's legal team discovered on August 30, 2024, that Minto had previously served as co-counsel with Wilkinson in several cases, some of which spanned nearly a decade and culminated in an appeal to the Privy Council. Despite the significant duration and nature of this professional relationship, it was not disclosed to Morrison or his representatives at the outset of the hearing. They argue that this omission compromises the perceived impartiality of the Chair and raises questions about the fairness of the proceedings.

Matthew Gayle, one of Morrison’s attorneys, emphasized the seriousness of the situation: “Given that the panel has considered the issue of recusal, substantively for a significant period of time, this ought to have been a matter that was disclosed to the parties so the athlete has no way of knowing but for information in the public domain. This should have been disclosed by the Chair herself and to the parties and give the athlete an opportunity to consider whether or not he wants to raise an objection, and in the circumstances where no disclosure has taken place it does raise a very serious question as to why,” he told Sportsmax.TV.

The application highlights multiple cases, including ones from 2014, 2016, and 2020, where Minto and Wilkinson worked closely together. Morrison’s legal team contends that this omission violates the ethical guidelines that require transparency and impartiality from those presiding over such hearings.

In April, Morrison was provisionally suspended by JADCO after testing positive for trace amounts of the banned anabolic agent Boldenone. Since then, he has been eagerly awaiting the chance to clear his name. His legal team has argued that Morrison unknowingly ingested the substance and is determined to prove his innocence.

The attorneys have requested that Minto either voluntarily recuse herself and be replaced by an alternate who has no recent or extensive professional ties to JADCO's counsel, or that the application for her recusal be decided by other members of the Independent Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel who are free from similar conflicts.

Morrison’s legal team stressed that this application was not made lightly, acknowledging that it could delay the proceedings. However, they assert that the integrity of the hearing and the athlete’s right to a fair trial must take precedence.

The outcome of this recusal application could significantly impact the course of the hearing, as both parties await a decision that will determine the next steps in this high-stakes case. Morrison remains resolute in his fight to prove his innocence and is hopeful that he will be granted a fair opportunity to do so.

The legal battle surrounding Jamaican squash player Julian Morrison has taken a contentious turn as his attorneys, Matthew Gayle and Dr. Emir Crowne of New City Chambers, are at odds with the Independent Anti-Doping Panel (IADP) over its decision to hold the upcoming hearing virtually. The dispute arose after Morrison’s legal team, who had planned to attend the hearing in person, was informed at the last minute that the proceedings set for September 3 and 4, would be conducted via Zoom.

Morrison, who was provisionally suspended by the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) in April after testing positive for trace amounts of the banned anabolic agent Boldenone, has been eagerly awaiting the chance to clear his name. His legal team has argued that Morrison unknowingly ingested the substance and is determined to prove his innocence.

Matthew Gayle expressed his frustration with the IADP’s unilateral decision to conduct the hearing virtually, especially given the substantial expenses incurred by the athlete for his legal team to travel to Jamaica.

“My personal opinion is that the unilateral decision by the Independent Panel to hold this hearing, a substantive hearing by virtual means, made at the 11th hour, and without any consultation with the parties, offends every sense of justice of the matter," Gayle said. "In particular, Dr. Crowne and I indicated that we were in the midst of making travel arrangements some two weeks ago, and this was communicated to the panel."

He continued, “Since then, the athlete has expended significant funds for us to travel to Jamaica in order to represent him in person, only to find out less than a week before we travel that the hearing is to be held by Zoom. This is in the context of there has been very little, if any, movement in bringing this matter to a head since April. It reeks of bureaucratic inefficiency. I just hope that the athlete is able to get a fair hearing. At the end of the day, this athlete has been on provisional suspension for a significant period, and the case is yet to be heard, yet to be proven.”

The situation escalated further when Sportsmax.TV obtained copies of the correspondence between Morrison’s representatives and Christine Minto, chairperson of the IADP. In the emails, Morrison’s legal team expressed their surprise and disappointment at the decision to hold the hearing virtually, especially after making it clear on multiple occasions that they intended to be present in Jamaica for the hearing.

“We are very surprised to learn that the choice of online forum for the hearing is on account of the athlete's representatives living/working out of the country. The experts appearing virtually is also a surprising rationale, since by that account there would rarely be an in-person hearing," the correspondence read.

The attorneys emphasized that their plans to attend in person had been communicated clearly, both verbally and in writing, yet the decision to go virtual was made without their input.

 In response, Minto defended the Panel’s decision, stating that the hearing had been conducted virtually from the start and that it should not have been unexpected that it would continue in the same manner. She pointed out that the athlete’s representatives did not specifically request an in-person hearing early enough and suggested that their decision to book accommodations in Jamaica was based on their preference to be in the same room as their client during the virtual hearing.

“This matter has been conducted virtually since the commencement of the hearing process. We have had at least four hearing dates so far, virtually. Therefore, it ought not to have taken anyone by surprise that the hearing will be continuing and concluding virtually," Minto explained.

She added, "A specific application ought to have been made for an in-person hearing by the athlete. Perhaps at the same time, as the application for a public hearing. It was certainly neither clear to us nor unequivocal that the athlete desired an in-person hearing. Further, the importance of the athlete’s evidence is not diminished or undermined if it is taken virtually.”

As the dispute over the hearing format continues, the focus remains on ensuring that Julian Morrison receives a fair trial and that the case, which has been pending for several months, reaches a timely conclusion.

The dates for the substantive anti-doping hearing for Jamaica’s national squash champion Julian Morrison have been set with his fate to be decided by an Independent Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel on September 3-4.

The dates for the substantive hearing were set during an initial hearing featuring the representatives of both Morrison and the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) on Thursday afternoon.

Morrison is challenging the provisional suspension imposed by the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) after testing positive for trace amounts of Boldenone, a banned anabolic agent.

The suspension came following an out-of-competition test conducted on January 18th, 2024, where Morrison's results showed the presence of Boldenone in his system.

However, Morrison and his representatives strongly assert that the substance entered his body inadvertently, likely through contamination.

In a bid to clear his name and restore his reputation, Jamaica's national squash champion, Julian Morrison, is challenging the provisional suspension imposed by the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) after testing positive for trace amounts of Boldenone, a banned anabolic agent.

The suspension came following an out-of-competition test conducted on January 18th, 2024, where Morrison's results showed the presence of Boldenone in his system. However, Morrison and his representatives strongly assert that the substance entered his body inadvertently, likely through contamination.

Dr. Emir Crowne and Mr. Matthew Gayle, legal representatives for Morrison, are steadfast in their support of his innocence. They emphasize that Boldenone's presence was unintentional and stress Morrison's commitment to upholding the integrity of the sport.

Speaking on behalf of Morrison, Dr. Crowne stated, "As best as can be determined at this time, the banned substance unknowingly entered Mr. Morrison's system through contamination." Morrison remains determined to expedite the process of vindication and is actively engaging with authorities to clear his name.

Boldenone, often associated with bodybuilding due to its anabolic properties, is prohibited in competitive sports. However, Morrison's case highlights the complexities of anti-doping regulations and the challenges faced by athletes when dealing with inadvertent exposure to banned substances.

Despite the setback, Morrison remains resolute and hopeful for a positive resolution. His representatives have expressed confidence in the ongoing efforts to overturn the suspension and restore Morrison's eligibility to compete.

Attorneys representing Jamaica and West Indies opening batsman John Campbell have expressed disappointment at the decision of an independent anti-doping panel to ban the cricketer for four years effective May 2022.

Campbell was charged with evading, refusing or failing to submit to sample collection in April 2022. In their 18-page ruling, the panel said in part: "The panel is persuaded to a comfortable degree of satisfaction that the athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation, namely a breach of JADCO rule 2.3. The panel does not find, on the evidence presented, that the athlete's anti-doping violation was not intentional.

"In the circumstances of this case, the athlete is ineligible for a period of four years."

This means the 29-year-old batsman will not be able to play cricket until he is 33 years old, which could significantly impact his ability to represent the West Indies beyond 2026.

Campbell has scored 888 runs in 20 Tests for the West Indies.

In response to the ruling, attorneys Ayana L. Thomas and Mark-Paul Cowan of the noted legal firm Nunes Scholefield Deleon and Co. made clear their disappointment and did not rule out appealing the judgement.

“Mr Campbell has been a clean athlete throughout his outstanding career as a batsman and he remains committed to a clean sport,” the statement read.

“It is important to emphasize that the allegations against him was not relating to an adverse analytical finding or banned substances. The allegation concerned refusing or failing to submit a 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.”

According to the attorneys, JADCO committed several breaches of the International Test Standards (IST).

“We have read the written decision of the disciplinary panel and believe there are legitimate grounds for an appeal concerning whether the necessary ingredients to sustain the alleged anti-doping rule violation were proved before the panel particularly as it relates to the notification requirements,” the lawyers said.

“Mr Campbell’s position was that he was not properly notified by JADCO. There were several breaches by JADCO of the mandatory International Testing Standards and Investigations in respect of the notification of the athlete of which, in our view, were not adequately addressed by the panel.”

That matter was not the only issue concern for Campbell’s attorneys.

“Additionally, there were several mitigatory factors supported by evidence which were not challenged by JADCO and which ought to have been mitigated against the imposition of the maximum penalty,” they said, “even if the panel found that the athlete committed a violation.

“It does not appear from the written decision that these factors in mitigation were adequately considered by the panel.

“Our client will, therefore, at this time, consider exercising his right of appeal after further consultation with his legal team and will make a decision shortly.”

“

The Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) has admitted that it had only tested three of the four members of Jamaica’s Women U20 4x100m relay team on April 17, 2022, after they had established the now rejected world record set at the 2022 Carifta Games held at the National Stadium in Kingston

Meantime, Garth Gayle, President of the Jamaica Athletics Administrative Association (JAAA), in describing the development as saddening, has indicated that his administration is planning to appeal the World Athletics decision to not ratify the record.

“We are saddened by the situation that four young ladies would be denied the record. The matter is still at a sensitive stage and we would have done the necessary appeals. We are still hopeful that the record will be ratified at a later stage,” he said.

World Athletics has rejected the ratification of the world record because not all members of the team were subjected to doping control. In a lengthy statement Wednesday, (JADCO) sought to explain the circumstances under which they failed to test all four members of the relay team.

“The event was won by the Jamaican team which was comprised of four female athletes. They completed the race with a world record of 42.58. Doping Control was conducted immediately on three of the female athletes,” the JADCO statement said.

“Since one of the athletes was already tested on the 16th of April 2022, a urine sample was not collected from this athlete on the 17th of April 2022. It is customary and in JADCO’s Best Practice in-competition, that if an athlete is tested today in-competition, the said athlete would not be tested the following day in-competition.”

JADCO claims it was instructed to carry out a specific number of tests for each day of the three-day championships that were being held in Jamaica for the first time since 2011.

“The Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) was contracted by the Jamaica Athletics Administrative Association (JAAA) to 18 urine samples throughout the period of the 49th staging of the CARIFTA Games. The Commission was advised to carry 6 urine tests per day with testing being done on any athlete who achieved a national/world record.

On April 16, 2022, six athletes were tested – three Jamaican female athletes, two male Jamaican athletes and one male athlete from the Bahamas.

On April 17, the day the world record was broken, JADCO tested nine athletes – six Jamaican female athletes, one Jamaican male athlete, one female athlete from the US Virgin Islands and one male athlete from the Bahamas.

Six more athletes were tested on April 18, 2022 – three Jamaican male athletes, one Jamaican female athlete, one male athlete from Curacao and one female athlete from the Bahamas.

Going forward, JADCO said they will ensure that all athletes breaking records would be tested.

“The Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission has recognized that World Athletics has declined to accept the result of the record-breaking performance of Jamaica’s Women’s U20 4x100m relay team on April 17, 2022, since one of the athletes previously tested by JADCO on April 16, 2022, was not tested on the day the record was broken,” the JADCO statement said.

“Whilst our testing conforms with the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) protocols, going forward JADCO will ensure the testing of record-breaking athletes despite the frequency of testing.”

-

Fitness athlete Deidre Lewis has characterized as unfair the decision of an Independent Anti-Doping Panel to impose a two-year ban on her after she tested positive for the banned substance Zeranol.

Lewis returned an adverse finding for Zeranol following an out of competition test on September 29, 2020, and was notified of the results in December that year. Zeranol is a synthetic, nonsteroidal estrogen found in fungi and is used mainly as an anabolic agent in veterinary medicine. It also may be found as a contaminant in fungus-infected crops.

Following hearings on February 11, March 18 and 31 and April 2, the panel of Kent Gammon, Denise Forrest and Dr Donovan Calder “did not find on the evidence presented that the athlete, Ms Denis Lewis, bears no fault or negligence whereby the applicable period of ineligibility can be eliminated.

“In the circumstances of this case, the athlete is ineligible for a period of two years.”

The two years began in December 2020, when the athlete was first notified of the adverse finding.

Lewis, who maintains that she did not intentionally ingest Zeranol, feels she was unfairly punished.

“I feel it was a bit unfair although they were doing their jobs,” she told Sportsmax TV in reaction to the ruling that was handed down earlier this week.

She said her diet is about 80 per cent plant-based and because of that she has to consume large amounts of grains and nuts to get the amount of nutrients her body requires for her to achieve the desired results. However, she was unable to pinpoint what food she might have consumed that was contaminated with the banned substance.

Lewis, who won the Ms Jamaica Bikini Fitness Short Class Champion and the Overall Bikini Fitness Champion in 2019, said she has always been compliant with the measures imposed not only by the JABBFA but also the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission. “I have remained complainant and transparent with my whereabouts reporting and have always been available for random tests during and outside of my sixty-minute testing times,” she said in her witness statement.

“In total, I have been subjected to six tests, the first of which was in 2017 at the National Championships. A majority of my tests were done between 2019 and 2020. I was tested at the national championship on September 8, 2019, and at the Central America and Caribbean Championships (CAC) on October 13, 2019,” she said.

“In 2020 I was tested on February 25, July 15, and on September 29. All of the tests conducted in 2020 were out-of-competition tests. I have never resisted any test that I have ever been subjected to and I am always easy to locate, even outside of my allotted sixty-minutes timeslot for testing. All of my test results have come back negative, except for the adverse findings in this instance, which has caused me significant emotional distress and financial strain.”

During the hearing the panel heard testimony from Professor Dr Wayne McLaughlin who said that based on the amount of Zeranol found in Lewis’ urine, he concluded that it occurred from ‘natural intake’, suggesting that the athlete did not deliberately take the substance to enhance performance.

“From these findings of very low levels of α-zeranol (0.04nh/ml) and β-zeranol (0.16ng/ml) in the athlete’s sample would imply natural intake. It is, therefore, our opinion that the substances found in the athlete’s urine sample support the assumption that mycotoxin contamination caused the findings in the doping control specimens rather than a misuse of the anabolic agent.”

However, Professor McLaughlin did concede that there were few studies on humans with Zeranol.

“This is disheartening,” Lewis said, “because there is limited research. I don’t feel it’s fair but I have to live with it. I would like to appeal but I don’t have the money.”