Fia'S Veredict On Renault'S Case

[Quiet One 15]

http://fialive.fiacommunications.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/wmsc/2009/Documents/wmsc_dossier_210909.pdf

http://fialive.fiacommunications.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/wmsc/2009/Documents/wmsc_decision.pdf

There you will find the full evidence dossier and FIA's decision. I've been grovelling through the whole documents (as well as McLaren's 115 pages transcript on the Stepneygate last night). I hope Adam will come around sometime soon to write things in a more clear fashion than I can. I have found many interesting points and I don't want to write a behemoth of a post yet so here are just a few points in short (and still will be a long post which will be totally misinterpreted):

* Nothing new there except for Mr.X (Speedracer's brother was in Renault?). Mr.X acts simply as an independent witness to confirm the Pat and Flavio knew about this before the crash. The letter from Frank Williams is a curious bit. Generous, but totally irrelevant, I think.

* No evidence that Briatore planned this.

* There is at least as much evidence that Piquet had the idea (Pat's letter) than he was told to (Piquet's letter). I tend to believe Pat, more than Piquet.

* Also, Pat says that he expected something better than Schumi at Monaco, but not Piquet acting "in a reckless fashion". He never mentions Briatore.

* For me, the most probable sequence of facts is not that of a conspiracy in the plain sense of the word, but more of a "he said he would crash. let him...you think he would dare?". It would be more of a conspiracy by omission than a flagrant, volitive act of cheating. That would be consistent with Flavio's reaction (I still think he would never be so good an actor to fake that "he's not a driver" phrase)

* There are many more things, including that I don't think Alonso is Mr.X, that the only hard, uncontestable evidence comes from Pat's letter which gives a proper context to telemetry, that Flavio's lifetime ban is inconsistent with the findings and even with the conspiracy that could been proved and that Renault should have been penalised harsher. Also, that Renault still deserved a lighter penalty than McLaren.

[Jean Todt 4]

Not that I want Reno to be punished, after reading all these, I still belive Reno should have been punished or banned for life if they were found guilty, but as I have said earlier, we are the actual clowns for listening to all these crap..

[yurp 0]

There you will find the full evidence dossier and FIA's decision. I've been grovelling through the whole documents (as well as McLaren's 115 pages transcript on the Stepneygate last night). I hope Adam will come around sometime soon to write things in a more clear fashion than I can. I have found many interesting points and I don't want to write a behemoth of a post yet so here are just a few points in short (and still will be a long post which will be totally misinterpreted):

* Nothing new there except for Mr.X (Speedracer's brother was in Renault?). Mr.X acts simply as an independent witness to confirm the Pat and Flavio knew about this before the crash. The letter from Frank Williams is a curious bit. Generous, but totally irrelevant, I think.

* No evidence that Briatore planned this.

* There is at least as much evidence that Piquet had the idea (Pat's letter) than he was told to (Piquet's letter). I tend to believe Pat, more than Piquet.

* Also, Pat says that he expected something better than Schumi at Monaco, but not Piquet acting "in a reckless fashion". He never mentions Briatore.

* For me, the most probable sequence of facts is not that of a conspiracy in the plain sense of the word, but more of a "he said he would crash. let him...you think he would dare?". It would be more of a conspiracy by omission than a flagrant, volitive act of cheating. That would be consistent with Flavio's reaction (I still think he would never be so good an actor to fake that "he's not a driver" phrase)

* There are many more things, including that I don't think Alonso is Mr.X, that the only hard, uncontestable evidence comes from Pat's letter which gives a proper context to telemetry, that Flavio's lifetime ban is inconsistent with the findings and even with the conspiracy that could been proved and that Renault should have been penalised harsher. Also, that Renault still deserved a lighter penalty than McLaren.

Is that an invitation? - can I bring the missis? - would it be okay to stop around (long way to travel back, especially if we drink)?

oh...right.

TBH you've said it - and far more clearly than I can at this time in the a.m.

Witness X is a joke, and doesn't even go so far as to say Flav planned this at all.

I do disagree with you in that I think Flav was involved in the planning (though less so than Symonds), it's just a joke that they can give him a lifetime ban on Jnr's say so.

I have to go teach now - will read properly later.

[yurp 0]

Mohammed Ben Sulayem, the United Arab Emirates' automobile clubpresident and an FIA vice-president, gave further insight into theWorld Motor Sport Council's decision to give Renault only a suspendedban. Speaking to his local newspaper, The National, Ben Sulayem said:"We did our negotiations before and everybody is happy with the result.The verdict is fair and everyone is a winner."Apart fromappearing to suggest the matter had been settled before the court satyesterday, Ben Sulayem also hints that wider considerations thanBriatore's role in fixing last year's Singapore race played a part. "Ihad to be loyal to my country as well as motor sport," said BenSulayem, whose country hosts its first grand prix on 1 November."Protecting the investments Abu Dhabi has made into Formula Oneis my duty; it is a big show and it needs teams. We all want to seeRenault [in Formula One]. This is the result everyone wanted."

source

it just keeps getting worse

right - really must go now!

[Schumikonen 2]

http://fialive.fiacommunications.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/wmsc/2009/Documents/wmsc_dossier_210909.pdf

http://fialive.fiacommunications.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/wmsc/2009/Documents/wmsc_decision.pdf

There you will find the full evidence dossier and FIA's decision. I've been grovelling through the whole documents (as well as McLaren's 115 pages transcript on the Stepneygate last night). I hope Adam will come around sometime soon to write things in a more clear fashion than I can. I have found many interesting points and I don't want to write a behemoth of a post yet so here are just a few points in short (and still will be a long post which will be totally misinterpreted):

* Nothing new there except for Mr.X (Speedracer's brother was in Renault?). Mr.X acts simply as an independent witness to confirm the Pat and Flavio knew about this before the crash. The letter from Frank Williams is a curious bit. Generous, but totally irrelevant, I think.

* No evidence that Briatore planned this.

* There is at least as much evidence that Piquet had the idea (Pat's letter) than he was told to (Piquet's letter). I tend to believe Pat, more than Piquet.

* Also, Pat says that he expected something better than Schumi at Monaco, but not Piquet acting "in a reckless fashion". He never mentions Briatore.

* For me, the most probable sequence of facts is not that of a conspiracy in the plain sense of the word, but more of a "he said he would crash. let him...you think he would dare?". It would be more of a conspiracy by omission than a flagrant, volitive act of cheating. That would be consistent with Flavio's reaction (I still think he would never be so good an actor to fake that "he's not a driver" phrase)

* There are many more things, including that I don't think Alonso is Mr.X, that the only hard, uncontestable evidence comes from Pat's letter which gives a proper context to telemetry, that Flavio's lifetime ban is inconsistent with the findings and even with the conspiracy that could been proved and that Renault should have been penalised harsher. Also, that Renault still deserved a lighter penalty than McLaren.

you still don't understand that it is irrelevant if he planned it or not, the main issue here is that he knew about it and he being the boss in that team didn't prevent it from happening and once it happened he didn't do anything about it, he didn't report it to the FIA, he didn't take any action like Renault did when all di came out, he even signed NP for another season, he even celebrate the triumph, he not only is guilty he deserve to be jailed for at least 60 years

[Quiet One 15]

you still don't understand that it is irrelevant if he planned it or not, the main issue here is that he knew about it and he being the boss in that team didn't prevent it from happening and once it happened he didn't do anything about it, he didn't report it to the FIA, he didn't take any action like Renault did when all di came out, he even signed NP for another season, he even celebrate the triumph, he not only is guilty he deserve to be jailed for at least 60 years

It is relevant with regards to the penalty imposed. If he was a witness which didn't went to the FIA, even as responsible of the team his penalty could have never been so much harsher than everybody else. The only thing that is (somewhat) proved against Briatore is that of negligence (he knew/suspected but he didn't act). The guy that PURPOSEDLY did it and is "a proven fact" is Piquet (the guy that is still around begging for a seat). The guy that admitted he was part of it either by negligence and/or active particpation gets a 5 years ban. If you assume that Briatore's role was an aggravation of the crime (which is true) he could have got a ban slightly smaller than Symonds (because we do not know how much FB knew or suspected about the said conspiracy according to the evidence) or harsher, but not by that much (because none of the findings even dare to presume that he actually ordered Piquet to crash). I wish Kay was around *sigh*

[Schumikonen 2]

It is relevant with regards to the penalty imposed. If he was a witness which didn't went to the FIA, even as responsible of the team his penalty could have never been so much harsher than everybody else. The only thing that is (somewhat) proved against Briatore is that of negligence (he knew/suspected but he didn't act). The guy that PURPOSEDLY did it and is "a proven fact" is Piquet (the guy that is still around begging for a seat). The guy that admitted he was part of it either by negligence and/or active particpation gets a 5 years ban. If you assume that Briatore's role was an aggravation of the crime (which is true) he could have got a ban slightly smaller than Symonds (because we do not know how much FB knew or suspected about the said conspiracy according to the evidence) or harsher, but not by that much (because none of the findings even dare to presume that he actually ordered Piquet to crash). I wish Kay was around *sigh*

What about the fact that he continue to lie about it? he is in constant denial of this case, how can you believe a man like this? and lie FIA says he didn't do anything to mitigate the charges, the rest of them admited it and apologised for what they did but he didn't, that's more than enough to take him out of the busines for ever like they did.

[Quiet One 15]

What about the fact that he continue to lie about it? he is in constant denial of this case, how can you believe a man like this? and lie FIA says he didn't do anything to mitigate the charges, the rest of them admited it and apologised for what they did but he didn't, that's more than enough to take him out of the busines for ever like they did.

We all know that the only crime that FIA consider's unforgivable is that of lieing in their faces. That's what ruined Ron more than any industrial espionage/lieing to steal a podium from Toyota. That is what saved Renault for having McLaren's documents. That is what saved Renault for being corporatively responsible for an "unparalelled scandal". FIA's case has always been: "You can kill another driver with your naked hands in front of the whole paddock, just don't lie at us when we ask you about it"

Anyways, even if he lie about this (which has not been proved at all so far but deducted from reading animal entrails I guess...much in the way you used to conclude that Alonso MUST be Mr.X ) it is still not enough to make him punible with a lifetime ban.

[Schumikonen 2]

We all know that the only crime that FIA consider's unforgivable is that of lieing in their faces. That's what ruined Ron more than any industrial espionage/lieing to steal a podium from Toyota. That is what saved Renault for having McLaren's documents. That is what saved Renault for being corporatively responsible for an "unparalelled scandal". FIA's case has always been: "You can kill another driver with your naked hands in front of the whole paddock, just don't lie at us when we ask you about it"

Anyways, even if he lie about this (which has not been proved at all so far but deducted from reading animal entrails I guess...much in the way you used to conclude that Alonso MUST be Mr.X ) it is still not enough to make him punible with a lifetime ban.

that doesn't mean I am not right.

[Quiet One 15]

that doesn't mean I am not right.

That doesn't mean you are right, either.

[Jean Todt 4]

That doesn't mean you are right, either.

[Rainmaster 7]

It is relevant with regards to the penalty imposed. If he was a witness which didn't went to the FIA, even as responsible of the team his penalty could have never been so much harsher than everybody else. The only thing that is (somewhat) proved against Briatore is that of negligence (he knew/suspected but he didn't act). The guy that PURPOSEDLY did it and is "a proven fact" is Piquet (the guy that is still around begging for a seat). The guy that admitted he was part of it either by negligence and/or active particpation gets a 5 years ban. If you assume that Briatore's role was an aggravation of the crime (which is true) he could have got a ban slightly smaller than Symonds (because we do not know how much FB knew or suspected about the said conspiracy according to the evidence) or harsher, but not by that much (because none of the findings even dare to presume that he actually ordered Piquet to crash). I wish Kay was around *sigh*

Yup that's about it. This case demonstrated all of the problems with FIA/WMSC setup.

[yurp 0]

Yup that's about it. This case demonstrated all of the problems with FIA/WMSC setup.

indeed

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

One thought.

Remember after the spanking incident with Max, he said he knew the identity of those involved, etc.

Interesting that he has gone heavily after Ron and Flav (and hates Luca). Does make you wonder if this was Max's retribution as a final act before going?

[yurp 0]

I agree - it's a very possible reason for Max going after Flav so blatently and viciously.

[Rainmaster 7]

One thought.

Remember after the spanking incident with Max, he said he knew the identity of those involved, etc.

Interesting that he has gone heavily after Ron and Flav (and hates Luca). Does make you wonder if this was Max's retribution as a final act before going?

It'll be that or it'll be because they were the main players in FOTA, or maybe it's both. Either way Max didn't set Briatore up in any way, Flavio gave him the opportunity to strike and he did, and I am sure Max is quite happy to be presented with such a gift.

[yurp 0]

It'll be that or it'll be because they were the main players in FOTA, or maybe it's both. Either way Max set Briatore up, Jnr gave him the opportunity to strike and he did, and I am sure Max is quite happy to be presented with such a gift.

Corrected your post

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

It'll be that or it'll be because they were the main players in FOTA, or maybe it's both. Either way Max didn't set Briatore up in any way, Flavio gave him the opportunity to strike and he did, and I am sure Max is quite happy to be presented with such a gift.

Depends who gave NPJ the original idea to crash Can't imagine he was bright enough to come up with it on his own