New evidence raises doubts over Olympian's doping ban

Paul Edwards, 66, of Winklebury, has fought to clear his name since being banned for life following a disputed urine test in 1997 over a doping charge.

The former GB shot-putter — who competed for Great Britain at the Seoul and Barcelona Olympics and won a Commonwealth Games bronze medal — has always maintained his innocence.

Now, a cache of documents, passed to the Basingstoke Gazette, raises fresh and serious questions about the scientific basis of the ban.

Paul Edwards maintains his innocence 30 years on

Mr Edwards, a former British number one in the shot put for eight years, first received a four-year ban in 1994 after testing positive at the European Championships in Helsinki - a verdict he contested from the outset.

On the eve of his return to competition in 1997, he was subjected to an out-of-competition urine test at his Winklebury home and was subsequently handed a lifetime ban after the sample was found to contain an abnormally high level of testosterone. He has always denied the charges.

The new documents, which include tribunal rulings, laboratory correspondence, parliamentary letters and independent scientific assessments, do not prove his innocence, but they raise serious and unanswered questions about whether the evidence used to ban him was scientifically sound and whether he was ever given a fair hearing.

Crucially, they show that the tribunal which convicted him acknowledged in writing that key measurement data was absent, and that the laboratory at the centre of the case later gave contradictory accounts about whether that data ever existed.

The Drug Advisory Committee, which first found a doping offence had been committed, acknowledged in its own ruling, dated July 1999, that it could not make a proper scientific assessment of the evidence against Mr Edwards.

In its determination, the committee states: "It is not possible to make a quantitative assessment of the epitestosterone to testosterone ratios, because no calibration data have been provided."

In plain terms, the panel admitted it could not accurately measure the key figures used to justify the ban, because the records needed to verify the testing equipment was working correctly had never been provided. Despite that admission, the committee found a doping offence had been committed anyway.

A document seen by this newspaper shows that Professor David Cowan, the former Director of the Drug Control Centre at King's College London, which tested Mr Edwards' samples, told the Information Commissioner's Office in 2009 that the laboratory had not checked whether its equipment was properly set up at the time of either test.

Yet five years earlier, in a formal letter to UK Sport, Prof Cowan had stated that such checks had been carried out and had produced reliable results.

The documents also include a letter written in August 2004 by Mr Edwards' then-MP Andrew Hunter, directly to Richard Caborn, the Minister of State for Sport.

Mr Hunter, who had raised Mr Edwards' case in a House of Commons adjournment debate in May 2002, told the minister that laboratory records analysed by experts "establish beyond doubt that the tests on Edwards were improperly conducted and that he has suffered a monstrous injustice."

He added: "How can UK Sport act as judge and jury over its own wrongdoings?"

No independent investigation was ever carried out.

1992: Paul Edwards of Great Britain in action during the Shot Putt event during the Panasonic Olympic Trialsand AAA's Championships in Birmingham, England. \ Mandatory Credit: Gray Mortimore/Allsport (Image: Gray Mortimore/Team GB)

No independent investigation was ever carried out.

Mr Edwards' current MP, Luke Murphy, has written to UK Athletics (UKA) urging a review. He says Mr Edwards "continues to feel that the process leading to his lifetime ban was fundamentally flawed and that key evidence was not properly considered at the time or in subsequent reviews."

Among the documents is a witness statement from Roger Draper, the Independent Sampling Officer who collected Mr Edwards' urine sample at his Winklebury home on 21 June 1997, and who later became Chief Executive of the Lawn Tennis Association.

Mr Draper confirms he did not carry out standard checks on the sample at the point of collection, and that he could not confirm exactly what he did with the sealed samples after leaving the property.

Court papers from Mr Edwards' 2013 High Court action show the samples' whereabouts could not be accounted for during a period of more than 24 hours before they reached the laboratory. A tape typically used to show whether packaging had been opened or damaged was present on the outer container on arrival. The second sample container also had to be forced open with a hacksaw, a detail described by an independent scientific reviewer as something that "staggers" him.

Despite these irregularities, the committee that imposed the life ban found that the samples had been securely handled throughout.

Dr Simon Davis of Imperial College London, who has advised Mr Edwards since 1998, states in a witness statement that the report he produced was compiled entirely from laboratory material that had been withheld from every one of Mr Edwards' hearings.

"As none of the data had been presented at any of Mr Edwards' hearings, the entirety of the report has to be new evidence," Dr Davis writes.

The report was submitted to UK Sport in December 2003. Freedom of Information requests later established that no formal written review ever took place.

Several independent scientific experts subsequently wrote to UK Sport stating there were "grave doubts over the validity of the analysis of Mr Edwards's urine" and calling for an independent review, including a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry and a Professor Emeritus at San Diego State University. A further independent assessment by Dr Paul Wynne, a scientific testing expert, concluded that the missing equipment verification records were "pivotal" and should have been provided.

Mr Edwards brought a High Court claim in 2013 against UK Athletics, UK Sport and King's College London, seeking the extinguishing of his life ban and £800,000 in damages. The case was thrown out on a legal technicality relating to time limits, without the scientific questions at its heart ever being examined by a court.

UKA has described the matter as historic and maintains the original decisions should stand.

JUN 1992: PAUL EDWARDS OF GREAT BRITAIN PREPARES TO TAKE HIS THROW IN THE SHOT PUTT COMPETITION IN THE UNITED KINGDOM CHAMPIONSHIPS AT THE DON VALLEY STADIUM IN SHEFFIELD, ENGLAND. (Image: Gray Mortimore/Team GB)

Mr Edwards has recently been told he must step down from his voluntary coaching role helping junior athletes at Walton AC because of the suspension. Luke Murphy says he is now suffering from a heart condition, and that his doctor believes the decades of stress from the unresolved case is likely to have contributed.

Speaking to the Gazette, Paul Edwards said: "The fight to prove my innocence over almost 30 years has taken a massive toll on my mental and physical wellbeing.

"No other athlete of my era was able to gather evidence like I have, against all odds, to try to overcome this terrible miscarriage of justice leading to my inhuman and unfair life ban.

"I have been treated more harshly than any other accused athlete, perhaps because I forced them to reveal evidence showing they failed to carry out any part of the testing or disciplinary process fairly.

"Life bans are against human rights, and imposing one on me, an innocent person, is especially wrong.

"As they know the truth, there is no excuse for them upholding the false disqualification and dragging things on so long in full knowledge of the real situation and my complete innocence."

UK Athletics declined to comment, stating the organisation's position remains the same on this matter.

UK Sport and King’s College London were also contacted for comment, but did not respond.