The race-fix case of Briatore and Symonds versus the FIA

[WhiteBlue]

hope you have carpet on the floor.

speaking of character assasination!! do you have anything at all in terms of proof for your assertions?

[SZ]

Proof? Ha! This is F1! There is no conclusive proof! For the French small man and the Red Baron I've no more proof than what the FIA's got on Flav and the Lesser Piquet.

Conclusive proof would rob the fans of the drama regardless... currently this is substituting for the lack of on-track action (is the season over? I hadn't noticed etc).

[nipo]

I suppose this thread is more on how the court case will progress. Inevitably it has become an argument over Flav's guilt and Max's personal agenda AGAIN.

And every time, SZ, when you come out with this, I need to speak up. And this time you are even contradicting yourself saying you cannot prove anything in F1 and demanding conclusive proof regarding Flav's guilt. Renault sacking Flav does NOT constitute proof, hell no. But it speaks A LOT and is a good basis for an educated guess. Now we have the benefit of hindsight that Renault lost major sponsors, can you tell me that saying "We (Renault) will not fight the case" means no loss to the company? It has lost at least credibility and budget for certain. If I were Renault and I wasn't sure that Flav was guilty, I would have summoned my every strength to fight it out with FIA/Max until the truth comes to light, thereby saving the company face, and the team sponsors and budget!

Flav was found guilty after Renault's internal investigations. Period.

On the other hand, we can also benefit from hindsight to see that Max was using this case to show Flav the door. I never disputed this point. I am just saying Max using this for his own agenda in no way implies Flav's innocence. Whether witness X was invented by Max to supplement Piquet's claim (which the world must have taken with a grain of salt, for the right reasons), and whether WMSC's findings represented the exact truth, we don't know. Probably the world hasn't seen the entire truth, and things might have been manipulated to some degree (i.e. Kangeroo court) so that the whole ordeal can be taylored to suit Max's liking, such as to hand out disproportioned punishment to Flav.

And that has NOTHING to do with whether Flav is guilty. That simple.

So what I am saying is Max is probably a bad guy, Flav is neither a saint, and you shouldn't have mixed the two up.

Hopefully, the court case can reveal more to the world. I am no legal expert so I don't know how it will proceed and whether more truth can be unearthed. If you ask me I'd prefer to have an independent investigation to dig deeper into Renault to see what really happened, so that we can stop making these guesses altogether. I doubt if that will be carried out, though, because Renault is a French company...

[SZ]

Settle petal, no contradictions here, sheath your caps lock.

My take on things:

- Flav wasn't proven guilty.
- Flav was sacked by Renault.
- RF1's own investigation - independently carried out - of three weeks, until prompted by the FIA, didn't implicate Flav.
- Within <24 hours of being told of this, the FIA changed the basis of the case from being one where the team was tried for race fixing, contravening the sporting code, to one where the complicity of a third person (Briatore) was actively sought. Witness X was produced in this very short period of time. In turn, the FIA's own findings implicating Flav relied on a witness who's name MM can't remember, who Flav was given no recourse to address and who RF1's lawyer never met. Neat.
- Race fixing is common in motorsport, as are actions of dangerous driving. This one gained unusual notoriety.
- It's somewhat amusing that MM was told of this in February by the prominent Piquet, but that a statement was made after termination of a driver contract. So the Piquets are idiots on two counts - (1) being OK with haven driven under contract under duress, but then having backflipped on their stance afterwards, and (2) willingly served as pawns for a bigger agenda. (Maybe Piquet Lesser gets a 2010 race seat out of this... who knows).
- You're blind if you can't read that the FIA/MM's agenda was Flav all along. Why fight Flav's innocence when it's been made clear that running with him is political suicide?
- The only conclusive proof in this shambles was Piquet Lesser's driving into a wall - and he walked. Piquet's testimony alone was not sufficient to implicate Flav; X's was, and X's testimony and Piquet Lesser's are mutually exclusive. A bit too tidy.

I've been pretty consistent on this.

Your take on things (I'll save the caps lock):

- RF1 sacked Flav, therefore it's likely he's guilty.
- RF1 lost credibility, therefore it's likely he's guilty.
- RF1 didn't fight the charges and defend Flav, therefore it's likely he's guilty.

It's an overly simplistic that belies the politics at hand. Don't run an F1 team any time soon.

Flav was judged guilty to the highest degree in this case and handed a very severe ban. The evidence supplanting his guilt is the flimsiest. There are no contradictions. I am not X, likely neither you (as X likely doesn't exist). I can't tell you whether or not, in truth, he's guilty or otherwise.

But neither could the FIA and yet they've sought to punish him extraordinarily.

It's highly likely that whatever court he appeals to will have difficulty establishing jurisdiction over the FIA, let alone a fair trial.

[WhiteBlue]

Joe Saward wrote a nice blog entry about the Briatore case and the recent publications

http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2009/12/ ... -the-exes/

He (Briatore) mumbled and grumbled to the media that Mosley was a beastly fellow and that the ex-FIA President had been “blinded by an excessive desire for personal revenge”. He accused the FIA of a breach “of the most basic rules of procedure and the rights to a fair trial”. He did not, of course, suggest that he was innocent of the charges.

One should not forget that Briatore twice declined the opportunity to defend himself and put the record straight. It does not shed a good light on his claim that he was a victim of revenge. Even if the WMSC was biased against him - as he claims - he should have exhausted his legal opportunities prior to bringing a private law suit against the federation. At least his "friend" Ecclestone was pushing for a less drastic punishment in the MWSC and Briatore could have done himself a favor by appearing before the counsil.

Joe Saward goes on to cite Mosley with two paragraphs that he thinks could become Briatore's epitaph.

Briatore should be the last person to complain the FIA have not treated him fairly. The FIA have repeatedly given him the benefit of the doubt. It did so when prohibited software was found in a car under his control; again when a component was removed from his team’s refuelling equipment; again when his team failed to declare properly the purpose of a particular suspension component, and most recently when they were caught with information illicitly acquired from another team. Each time his team was caught, the FIA accepted Briatore’s claim that he was not involved.

This time, however, it was different. There was overwhelming evidence he was directly involved in ordering Nelson Piquet Jnr to crash. And his conduct was particularly reprehensible because he was Piquet’s personal manager, the very person to whom a young driver would turn for advice if ordered to do something dangerous or unethical by his team. Once the FIA had a sworn statement from Nelson Piquet Jnr confirming he was ordered to crash, a full inquiry conducted by outside lawyers was inevitable. That inquiry, like Renault’s own investigation, established Briatore’s responsibility beyond question. The suggestion that all this was somehow manufactured for reasons of personal vengeance is a desperate and unsustainable argument.

I fully agree with the statement. I expect a comprehensive defeat for Briatore on January 5th when the judgement of Briatore vs FIA is released.

[Fil]

Joe Saward has some good blogs sometimes, other times he's quite ordinary i think. Still a good read & part of my bookmarked F1 routine.

I expect a comprehensive defeat for Briatore on January 5th when the judgement of Briatore vs FIA is released.

I don't think the case is disputing Flav's guilt, otherwise he would most probably be comprehensively defeated.

But was he fairly judged? If this is what the case he has brought against the FIA, he has a fighting chance, especially when he was advised not to appear, as he, as an employee, was not to be the target of the case; the employer, Renault F1, was.


Briatore:
"..Mr Mosley explain that he expressed to me over the phone on September 19th 2009, that my presence at the hearing of the World Council of 21st September was neither necessary nor desirable, in the context of a difficult session for Renault, while since such hearing may, in any event, not result into any decision against myself."

If his legal team was able to prove that the FIA case was not about him or that they have no jurisdiction over individuals, he may just have won the civil case now.

[donskar]

Joe Saward has some good blogs sometimes, other times he's quite ordinary i think. Still a good read & part of my bookmarked F1 routine.

I expect a comprehensive defeat for Briatore on January 5th when the judgement of Briatore vs FIA is released.

I don't think the case is disputing Flav's guilt, otherwise he would most probably be comprehensively defeated.

But was he fairly judged? If this is what the case he has brought against the FIA, he has a fighting chance, especially when he was advised not to appear, as he, as an employee, was not to be the target of the case; the employer, Renault F1, was.


Briatore:
"..Mr Mosley explain that he expressed to me over the phone on September 19th 2009, that my presence at the hearing of the World Council of 21st September was neither necessary nor desirable, in the context of a difficult session for Renault, while since such hearing may, in any event, not result into any decision against myself."

If his legal team was able to prove that the FIA case was not about him or that they have no jurisdiction over individuals, he may just have won the civil case now.

I agree that Briatore will and should lose, but his claim quoted above:
Briatore:

"..Mr Mosley explain that he expressed to me over the phone on September 19th 2009, that my presence at the hearing of the World Council of 21st September was neither necessary nor desirable, in the context of a difficult session for Renault, while since such hearing may, in any event, not result into any decision against myself."

does bear some examination.

[Ciro Pabón]

Well, here you have my examination (and I'm not laughing):

If this is a case of who's the greater SOB, as Saward, very unprofessionally, puts it, Mosley wins hands (or pants) down. It's easy to detect who is guiltier: in these kinds of fights, the one with the darker soul is left standing...

Piquet's role, if we're going to talk about "desperate measures" hasn't receveived enough criticism. If Mosley is a lizard with a chequebook, Piquet is a snake with a racing car.

Frankly, taking in account the juicy story you could write, you are left with the impression that journalist are terribly scared of posting anything against Mosley. That's easy to understand: the path of broken writers left behind Mosley's trek through F1 is also impressive. Cowardice is full of subtleties...

I guess the venom is still in their hearts, so we will learn more dirty things once they decide it is the proper time.

It reminds me of Marius and Julius Caesar fight, among the broken ruins of the Roman Republic (take in account I just re-read Gibbons, so maybe I'm not the best commentator you can find right now). Anyway, it doesn't take a genius to predict that we have a Dark Age ahead.

The spirit of F1 is broken: first Ferrari domination, then a rosary of dirty tricks, now Todt directing the tragedy representation. Is Todt able to do anything? It's like asking George W. to investigate George's invasion of Panama.

Can Mosley say anything about Briatore, when he has discredited the sport more than anyone in history?

I swear I'm not making this up: here you have a word-by-word quote of the Nika riots in Wikipedia. It's marvelous how history repeats itself:

"The team associations had become a focus for various social and political issues for which the general Byzantine population lacked other forms of outlet.

The general Byzantine population... they were talking about this forum, I bet.

You have to wonder why somebody would waste time or paper on Mosley's press releases. They sound like "Yes, I robbed, but he robbed more". Fortunately Mosley's opinions have lower credibility than the ones of mafiosi, reposessors or rats: he's a lawyer, after all. That says it all.

He claims (cynicism at its highest peak) that he knew Briatore was guilty, but he left him to work his magic not once, not twice, but several times. And he claims to be now a good judge of Briatore?

C'mon. "He robbed once, he robbed twice, he robbed three times, he robbed four times, but, hey, now I have become a fair and honest judge, so he is receiving what he deserves!". Nice: this is the kind of judge that we have had for a decade (a cosmically stupid one, by his own admission).

You have to wonder who's guilty of inspiring this kind of feelings into the CEOs souls. My answer is simple: Ecclestone started everything when he robbed the automobile clubs of their sport and converted it into the spectacle we witness today. You can't blame Ecclestone alone, he has had his disciples, but if this were Star Trek, he's Palpatine.

Finally, expect more of the same: declarations by Mr. Lux, new investor in Renault (they sound evil, if you ask me, given the current atmosphere that surrounds Renault F1 team).

"Together with Renault, we intend to run the team with the same values as any of our other investments, prioritising ambitious performance targets without neglecting cost efficiency. We strongly believe that on-track performance can be compatible with business performance, and we will use all our entrepreneurial spirit and commercial know-how to achieve this goal."

Isn't capitalism wonderful?

[xpensive]

My sentiments precisely, esteemed moderator, which I am certain to share with the vast majority of this great forum.

Some members, perhaps those coming from cultures with a history of bending to autocracy, might differ of course.

[WhiteBlue]

The nice thing about an open democratic forum is that everyone can have an opinion (as long as the moderator hasn't got a bad day and gives an Idi Amin). Those are the days I hate.

But otherwise we happily go off topic when the dry spell of the winter months falls on us. Thank god that we now have the silly season in winter with the new teams supporting the effort. Or should I rather say thank Max. It is dread full without testing! We do not get any pictures of aero tweaks to set up controversies of who cheats by wing flexibilities or secrete additional pedals, moving floors or new diffusor interpretation. We cannot speculate about the level of fuel and sand bagging in the latest test runs and there are virtually no leaks from the teams unless a misguided janitor or cleaner spills his beans about McLaren's latest twist to the canteen menu.

But I'm deviating from the topic at hand, as you do. We are supposed to discuss the evil trinity of Max, Bernie and Jean now that the twins have gained support freshly plucked from dark empire of Maranello. Naturally Briatore's transgressions have nothing to do with his own ideas and responsibilities. That would be extremely naive and only fools would think that a person of such integrity and moral robustness could deviate one iota from the path of virtue. So we naturally mistrust those poor lost souls who offer opinion to the contrary. The regime of terror has ground them down to shivering bread crumbs. They fall over their feet to hail the evil trinity and give their lost souls over to the dark side for the lentil dish of a paddock pass.

All this is very sad but lets not get diverted from the real joys of the season. We can wear silly hats, drink ourselves senseless and laugh over the foolish efforts of those who do not live in the home land motor sport. With the tumb Germanic tribes, the scheming and cheating Italians the inept Japanese nicely send home this year we can look forward to sell our expertise to Indians, Malays and perhaps some hapless dixie rebels. So off we go to another year of business as usual.

[Rob W]

..but if this were Star Trek, he's Palpatine..

Errrr.. Star Wars perhaps?

Aside from this, total kudos to the rest of your post Ciro. Love your work.

[xpensive]

Hmm...MrE is perhaps more like "Q" in Star Trek Next Generation?

[jon-mullen]

Hmm...MrE is perhaps more like "Q" in Star Trek Next Generation?

Shows up randomly to annoy the hell out of everyone...can conjure people who don't exist...thinks he's teaching people a lesson but is only really interested in stroking his own perceived omnipotence...I think you hit the nail on the head there.


Here's one that's a bit of a mind-bender in hindsight. July 26th we've got the Hungarian GP, the looming death of the young Surtees, Massa's injury, and Alonso's mechanics releasing him with an improperly attached wheel. The FIA hands out a 2 race suspension citing the rules that say it's the team's responsibility to run a safe car. IIRC they hadn't dished out a suspension like that since BAR "ran fuel as ballast".

They make everyone come to France in the middle of the summer break just to let them off with a $50K fine and lift the suspension. Two weeks later they're blowing their whole house down with the race-fixing allegations.

So was the whole 2 race suspension really just to rattle their cage over summer break or was it an honest reaction to the misfortunes surrounding the Hungarian GP? Does that really seem outside of Mosley's modus operandi to be so vindictive as to mess with them knowing he's about to totally eff them anyway? Or is this perhaps where he met and heard Witness X? Of course with the governing body being what it is/was we'll never know.

imho, the changes to the rules we've heard about in the last couple weeks do have a ring of common sense to them, so I give props to Todt there.

[xpensive]

Hmm...MrE is perhaps more like "Q" in Star Trek Next Generation?

Shows up randomly to annoy the hell out of everyone...can conjure people who don't exist...thinks he's teaching people a lesson but is only really interested in stroking his own perceived omnipotence...I think you hit the nail on the head there.

I don't know Jon, now that you have described him so eloquently, perhaps "Q" is more MrM than MrE afterall?

[jon-mullen]

Ooh, misread you there, I thought we were talking about MrM!

For as long as I've been watching F1 (not a terribly long time, relatively) MrE has reminded me of Mr. Magoo. Perhaps evil wanes with age and senility?