The “amnesty window” concept for truth and reconciliation in cycling has been kicked around for a while but, according to one of the Great Thinkers with which Pappillon is regularly in consultation, it’s total fantasy. He writes:
The only way it could possibly work is if there were a single, worldwide doping authority that total control over national or local organizations. If there were any disagreement to the terms of clemency, it simply wouldn’t work. We know this is obvious, but here’s an example: Let’s say American Pro Bob Beaver wants to come clean. He also doesn’t want to risk his right to work. USADA and WADA both agree to open a “fess up, boy” window at the end of the season. He signs some papers, makes a statement, joins the bio passport program and slips on a blue wristband - or some combination of events that convince everyone else (and himself) that from this point on he’ll be clean. Unfortunately, the Dutch [or Austrian] authorities aren’t exactly on the same page and while they’ll let Bob’s team come race some kermesses, they won’t let Bob race. Or maybe they will, but details of the Dutch amnesty require a 6-month suspension.
Apparently, the devil is in the details and there’s no way all those organizations could ever come to an agreement.