I don't know why they gave her an extra year. Maybe it's possible that they considered the following as aggravating factors: 1) the fact that she admitted using the stuff over a period of time rather than just once, and 2) that she responded with the comment below after being sent home from London for admitting that she'd been injecting the veterinary blood booster PED "Blast Off Red". (Veterinary-only drugs are prohibited by WADA, despite the fact that substances in them may not have been added to the banned substance list since they aren't approved for human use.)"Williams took to Facebook despite an agreement that the matter would be handled discreetly to avoid a media frenzy.
“Although results from a drug test in early June came back clean I was sent home due to false accusations. It's sad to see a 22-year-old’s dreams washed away by people who don't believe in me. W/ no chance of a second drug test to prove my innocence I was dismissed. SKN I am not sorry for working hard all year and I have never taken illegal substances to enhance my performance or any thereof.”
http://www.thestkittsnevisobserver.com/ ... liams.html
From IAAF Competition Rules:Aggravating Circumstances which may Increase the Period of Ineligibility
6. If it is established in an individual case involving an anti-doping rule
violation other than violations under Rule 32.2(g) (Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking) and Rule 32.2(h) (Administration or Attempted Administration) that aggravating circumstances are present which justify the imposition of a period of Ineligibility greater than the standard sanction, then the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable shall be increased up to a maximum of four (4) years unless the Athlete or other Person can prove to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel that he did not knowingly commit the anti-doping rule violation.
(a) Examples of aggravating circumstances which may justify the imposition of a period of Ineligibility greater than the standard sanction are: the Athlete or other Person committed the anti- doping rule violation as part of a doping plan or scheme, either individually or involving a conspiracy or common enterprise to commit anti-doping rule violations; the Athlete or other Person used or possessed multiple Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods or used or possessed a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method on multiple occasions; a normal individual would be likely to enjoy performance-enhancing effects of the anti-doping rule violation(s) beyond the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility; the Athlete or other Person engaged in deceptive or obstructing conduct to avoid the detection or
adjudication of an anti-doping rule violation. For the avoidance of doubt, the examples of aggravating circumstances referred to above are not exclusive and other aggravating factors may also justify the imposition of a longer period of Ineligibility.