I'm not in a position to know whether those cases will be relevant or not. I've not read mention of them before. I'm sure if they are then Armstrong's defence team will make use of them at some point.
For what it's worth, I agree with you. I fully expect Armstrong to launch some kind of appeal should he get sanctioned but clearly he has to go through the USADA process first. Whether that appeal (first with CAS and then wherever might follow that) overturns the USADA decision is another matter though.
If you do nothing else skim the last few pages of
Lessons from USADA v. Jenkins: You Can’t Win When You Beat a Monopoly
The "it's not a court of law" statements above are of course true, butthis article explamins why legal advocates have concerns over just that!
The system fails to protect the athletes basic rights in a court of law.
The story of USADA v. Jenkins reveals a system created by a monopoly that wields power without sufficient restriction or balance. The system’s current flaws can be addressed by adopting the above specific suggestions. However, as much as athletes would like to be optimistic, those suggestions are not likely to be adopted or sustained until the monopoly’s powers are countervailed in one of three ways:
(1) The legal fiction that sustains the monopoly, namely the theory of voluntary association, is replaced with a legal doctrine that recognizes the monopolistic power of sports governing bodies; or
(2) An athletes’ union with genuine bargaining power is organized, perhaps starting with United States based union organized under U.S. Labor Law; or
(3) A court finds that USADA (and potentially other National Anti-Organizations) is a state actor and that participation in sports is a property right that can only be taken away through constitutionally restrained methods.
So whether you wish to dismiss the concerns over the USADA'as ill educated, there are senior members of the the US legal system who share the concerns.
Secondly the mention of appeals, this is another common mistake amongst us ill-educated and ill-informed, when we point out that another major concern is that you cannot appeal to the USADA, any appeals are heard by the CAS ( The Court of Arbitration for Sport) who have already sat on the USADA and ae fully advised bythe USADA. There is no independent appeal, in fact theoretically it is possible that two of the three person panel finding the individual guilty can actually hear an appeal against their own decision, and in a best case scenario will still have an (alleged) interest in holding up the original decision
.. and I am afraid you are mistaken with the statement "first with CAS and then wherever might follow that" USADA have closed down the appeal process. After CAS there is no right of appeal, USADA can bring the same case as many times as they like (they wrote out double jeopardy) yet the athlete can only appeal once to a possibly biased hearing!
By all means those who think the USADA is a knight in shinng armor may continue to do so, byt the previously dismissed points about their dirty tricks and their failure to meet basic legal and constitutional standards are sooner or later going ti bite them
Latasha Jenkins case was won by a lecturer and four law students, with an experienced and unscrupulous operator like Armstrong, and a ferocious legal team there is a lot for them to be worried about.
If Armstrong can voice and raise the legitimate concerns held by others in the legal system about USADA and iyt's procedures, this may yet end up with USADA on trial instead!
