More Top Picks Best Anti Glare Glasses For Night Driving
player ready...In a key test of strict new anti-doping rules Tuesday, U.S. sprinter Torri Edwards was ruled out of the 2004 Olympics when an arbitration panel upheld a two-year suspension imposed after she’d tested positive for a banned stimulant.
The panel from the Court of Arbitration for Sport held Edwards, 27, responsible for taking glucose tablets laced with nikethamide at a meet in April in Martinique, an island in the French Caribbean.
She had said she didn’t know the tablets contained the stimulant. The panel said she should have known and upheld the two-year ban, the typical sanction for a first doping offense.
Edwards had been considered a medal contender in the sprints. At the U.S. Olympic trials she finished second in the 100 and third in the 200. Her spot in the 100 will go to Gail Devers, her spot in the 200 to LaShaunte’a Moore.
Edwards’ attorney, Emmanuel Hudson, who runs the HSI track club in Southern California, could not be reached for comment.
Edwards’ suspension will run until July 17, 2006.
The case was a major test of an aggressive new anti-doping stance for all Olympic sports.
Track and field’s worldwide governing body, the International Association of Athletics Federations, adopted the code Aug. 20, 2003, then implemented it March 1. Edwards took the glucose pills seven weeks later.
Under the IAAF’s former anti-doping rules, she would have received only a public warning.
In affirming Edwards’ suspension, the arbitration panel rejected her claim that the code’s standard ban of two years–for a mistake, and a first offense at that–was unduly harsh. She had claimed her act was “isolated, inadvertent, unknowing and unintentional.”
Under what is called “strict liability,” however, an athlete is responsible for what is in his or her system. The panel said she had been negligent, adding that every athlete had “an obligation and a duty to ensure that no prohibited substance enters his [or] her body, tissues and fluid.”