Renault's 'crash gate' - FIA hearing on 21 September

[Jim Watt]

Greetings Chaps!

Once again my incredible naivete about F1 has led to my pooh-poohing what has, on later collection of data proven to be true

I couldn't believe that Flav would (a) be so stupid as even get close to such a ridiculous plan or (b) that young Piquet would be dumb enough to carry it out.

I guess if the Hambone can be made to "stretch" the truth, a moron like Jr. can be made to put it on life support.

I hope that Flav & Symmonds AND the Piquets are all issued with lifetime bans.

As to Alonso? Well a WDC never lies, as we all know.

Jim Watt

[Julian Mayo]

Jim, these guys really do represent the old axiom
........"stupid people don't realise they are stupid".
How many people in a race team?
No matter when or how, it would have come out.
Jnr has no honour.
Briatore....pfffft.
It concerns me that the number of wiffy incidents occuring in Alonso's vicinity continue to increase. Nothing more or less, than the fact that it concerns me,
How much will Ferrari pay, n beg, Kimi to stay, now?

[Ed]

It has been reported in the British media that Fernando Alonso has been summoned to the FIA hearing taking place on Monday the 21st of September.

Speculation about the reason for Alonso's appearance ranges from actually knowing about the race fixing charge to questions about the relationship between him and Flavio Briatore.

More: Alonso summoned to Renault crash-gate hearing

[RE30B#16]

Initially, I dismissed this whole Renault "crash-gate" business as press/tabloid-esque bluster, but now my jaw is on the floor. I am not surprised in the least that this behavior came from Flavio Briatore, however. Obviously, he has been getting away with murder for a long time.

That said, I must agree with Martin Bundle the Nelsinho Piquet's F1 career is over and done with. Even if he wins a lawsuit against everyone involved, he has proven himself to be dangerous, ruthless, opportunistic-to-a-fault, and untrustworthy. If he cared so much about what happened last year, we should have heard about this last year. No doubt he and his clue-less former 3-time WDC dad attempted to use these events as leverage to keep Piquet Jr in a Renault despite his obvious lack of ability at the F1 level.

It is possible that Fernando Alonso happened to simply be in the stronger position at the team having won them 2 championships and not directly responsible for the teams overall actions' (as he is truthfully an independent contractor to the team and not simply an employee). However, if anyone wants to question Alonso's sportsmanship, they must include Michael Schumacher in the discussion as he had his worst history of sportsmanship while involved with the Briatore led Benetton Team (today's Renault team). Dodgy crashes (with Damon Hill and Jacques Villeneuve) and other things cost him his points for an entire season.

I halfway expected to read about Nelson Piquet Sr fanagling a seat at Williams for his son, but that ain't gonna happen now regardless of how good a friend Sir Frank is to his former WDC.

[RE30B#16]

... Nelsinho should be ashamed to have participated in such charade. At least Piquet did some effort to inform the authorities...

About one year too late, and only out of spite it seems.

[Ed]

The World Motor Sport Council handed Renault a suspended disqualification from Formula 1 until the end of the 2011 season. The disqualification would be activated if Renault is found guilty of a comparable offence.

The FIA will not sanction any event that Flavio Briatore is associated with for an unlimited period of time. The FIA will not issue superlicenses to any driver under Flavio Briatore's management

The FIA will will not sanction any event that Pat Symonds is associated with for a period of five years.

Nelson Piquet was granted immunity

The FIA concluded that Fernando Alonso was not in any way involved in the Renault breach.

Full FIA statement:

World Motor Sport Council 21/09/2009
At an extraordinary meeting of the World Motor Sport Council held in Paris on 21 September 2009, the ING Renault F1 team (“Renault F1”) admitted that the team had conspired with its driver Nelson Piquet Jr. to cause a deliberate crash at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, in breach of the International Sporting Code and F1 Sporting Regulations.


Renault F1 stated at the meeting that it had conducted a detailed internal investigation, which found that: (i) Flavio Briatore, Pat Symonds and Nelson Piquet Jr. had conspired to cause the crash; and (ii) no other team member was involved in the conspiracy.

The FIA has conducted its own detailed investigation and its findings correspond with those of Renault F1.

At the meeting of the World Motor Sport Council, Renault F1 made the following points in mitigation:

- it had accepted, at the earliest practicable opportunity, that it committed the offences with which it was charged and cooperated fully with the FIA’s investigation;
- it had confirmed that Mr. Briatore and Mr. Symonds were involved in the conspiracy and ensured that they left the team;
- it apologised unreservedly to the FIA and to the sport for the harm caused by its actions;
- it committed to paying the costs incurred by the FIA in its investigation; and
- Renault (the parent company, as opposed to Renault F1) committed to making a significant contribution to FIA safety-related projects.

Nelson Piquet Jr. also apologised unreservedly to the World Motor Sport Council for his part in the conspiracy.

The following decision was taken:

The World Motor Sport Council finds that Renault F1 team members Flavio Briatore, Pat Symonds and Nelson Piquet Jr. conspired to cause a deliberate crash at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. The World Motor Sport Council therefore finds Renault F1, which, under article 123 of the International Sporting Code, is responsible for the actions of its employees, in breach of Articles 151(c) and point 2(c) of Chapter IV of Appendix L of the Code, and Articles 3.2, 30.3 and/or 39.1 of the Formula One Sporting Regulations.

The World Motor Sport Council considers Renault F1’s breaches relating to the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix to be of unparalleled severity. Renault F1’s breaches not only compromised the integrity of the sport but also endangered the lives of spectators, officials, other competitors and Nelson Piquet Jr. himself. The World Motor Sport Council considers that offences of this severity merit permanent disqualification from the FIA Formula One World Championship. However, having regard to the points in mitigation mentioned above and in particular the steps taken by Renault F1 to identify and address the failings within its team and condemn the actions of the individuals involved, the WMSC has decided to suspend Renault F1’s disqualification until the end of the 2011 season. The World Motor Sport Council will only activate this disqualification if Renault F1 is found guilty of a comparable breach during that time.

In addition the World Motor Sport Council notes Renault F1’s apology and agrees that the team should pay the costs of the investigation. It also accepts the offer of a significant contribution to the FIA’s safety work.

As regards Mr. Briatore, the World Motor Sport Council declares that, for an unlimited period, the FIA does not intend to sanction any International Event, Championship, Cup, Trophy, Challenge or Series involving Mr. Briatore in any capacity whatsoever, or grant any license to any Team or other entity engaging Mr. Briatore in any capacity whatsoever. It also hereby instructs all officials present at FIA-sanctioned events not to permit Mr. Briatore access to any areas under the FIA’s jurisdiction. Furthermore, it does not intend to renew any Superlicence granted to any driver who is associated (through a management contract or otherwise) with Mr. Briatore, or any entity or individual associated with Mr. Briatore. In determining that such instructions should be applicable for an unlimited period, the World Motor Sport Council has had regard not only to the severity of the breach in which Mr. Briatore was complicit but also to his actions in continuing to deny his participation in the breach despite all the evidence.

As regards Mr. Symonds, the World Motor Sport Council declares that, for a period of five years, the FIA does not intend to sanction any International Event, Championship, Cup, Trophy, Challenge or Series involving Mr. Symonds in any capacity whatsoever, or grant any license to any Team or other entity engaging Mr. Symonds in any capacity whatsoever. It hereby instructs, for a period of five years, all officials present at FIA-sanctioned events not to permit Mr. Symonds access to any areas under the FIA’s jurisdiction. In determining that such instructions should be effective for a period of five years the World Motor Sport Council has had regard: (i) to Mr. Symonds’ acceptance that he took part in the conspiracy; and (ii) to his communication to the meeting of the World Motor Sport Council that it was to his “eternal regret and shame” that he participated in the conspiracy.

As regards Mr. Piquet Jr., the World Motor Sport Council confirms the immunity from individual sanctions under the International Sporting Code in relation to this incident, which the FIA had granted to him in exchange for volunteering his evidence.

As regards Fernando Alonso, the World Motor Sport Council thanks him for cooperating with the FIA’s enquiries and for attending the meeting, and concludes that Mr. Alonso was not in any way involved in Renault F1’s breach of the regulations.

The World Motor Sport Council would like to thank the Stewards and legal investigation team (in particular Dorothy Cory-Wright of Sidley Austin LLP who conducted the interviews at the Belgian Grand Prix).

The full reasons for this decision, in addition to a complete recording of the proceedings before the World Motor Sport Council, will be made available shortly.

[Ed]

Renault followed with the following statement:

ING Renault F1 Team Statement

Following the decision of the World Motor Sport Council concerning the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, Renault F1 Team president Bernard Rey issued the following statement to the media gathered in Paris:

"We are very sad to find ourselves in front of the Word Motor Sport Council today.

"By way of background, as a result of our own enquiries, we informed the FIA last week that we would not defend the charges and we accepted our responsibilities in relation to the incident in Singapore and we immediately took appropriate action inside the team.

"Today, we fully accept the decision of the Council. We apologize unreservedly to the F1 community in relation to this unacceptable behaviour. We sincerely hope that we can soon put this matter behind us and focus constructively on the future. We will issue further information in the next few days."

[RE30B#16]

I am absolutely astonished at this outcome.

That Nelson Piquet Jr comes through this without any punishment whatsoever seems unbelievably unfair to me. He directly endangered himself, his fellow competitors, track workers, race officials and fans, yet somehow he escapes even a slap on the wrist. By waiting so long to tell this story suggests he is opportunistic to a fault. Would this be happening now if he had not been sacked by Renault a few weeks ago?

This ruling inadvertently penalizes Fernando Alonso, Mark Webber, Heikki Kovalainnen, and any other driver who received their super-license while being managed by Flavio Briatore. There is no stipulation that the ban will not adversely affect other drivers who are managed by Briatore. It seems to me that those drivers will have to sue to get out of their contracts with Briatore simply in order to renew their super-licenses.

Correct me, Ed, if I am reading this wrong.

[Ed]

I am absolutely astonished at this outcome.

That Nelson Piquet Jr comes through this without any punishment whatsoever seems unbelievably unfair to me. He directly endangered himself, his fellow competitors, track workers, race officials and fans, yet somehow he escapes even a slap on the wrist. By waiting so long to tell this story suggests he is opportunistic to a fault. Would this be happening now if he had not been sacked by Renault a few weeks ago?

This ruling inadvertently penalizes Fernando Alonso, Mark Webber, Heikki Kovalainnen, and any other driver who received their super-license while being managed by Flavio Briatore. There is no stipulation that the ban will not adversely affect other drivers who are managed by Briatore. It seems to me that those drivers will have to sue to get out of their contracts with Briatore simply in order to renew their super-licenses.

Correct me, Ed, if I am reading this wrong.

In answering your question regarding Piquet, yes it does seem that the FIA have been too lenient with him by granting him full immunity. In my view he should be penalised particularly that he did this only after he was sacked by Renault.

As for your second point, I would imagine the drivers would have get out clauses in their management contracts. Besides, the point of being a manager is to get them the right contracts be it for driving or sponsorship and with Flavio Briatore being banned from any event, his management operation will cease to exist.

[JayVee]

I am glad at the outcome. Briatore and Symonds have been punished, Renault given a warning and Alonso has been cleared.

The only thing that bothers me is that Piquet gets away without any punishment! He only came out because he was fired. Anyway I don't think we will see him racing again.

I hope Formula 1 can now focus on racing for a change!!

[Ed]

The FIA have released the complete dossier of the Renault crash-gate scandal. It can be found at the FIA website here

.................. The documentation reveals a witness from within Renault (only identified as Witness X) who confirmed that Piquet Jr, Symonds and Briatore conspired to crash deliberately.

In those additional submissions, Renault F1 referred to the existence of another member of the Renault F1 team (“Witness X”) who, although not a conspirator himself, knew of the conspiracy at the time of the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. Renault F1 stated in its submissions of 17 September 2009 that Witness X had confirmed that Mr Briatore had known of the deliberate crash plan before it had been put into effect.

Renault F1 submitted that Witness X was a ‘whistleblower’ within its team and that if his identity were to be revealed it may discourage other similarly situated persons to come forward in relation to this or other matters. The FIA considered this argument to have some merit, given that Witness X was said not himself to be a conspirator. However, the FIA considered that this argument had to be balanced against the requirements of the FIA’s investigation and the requirement to put the full facts before the WMSC. The FIA therefore agreed with Renault F1 that the identity of Witness X would be made known to the FIA’s President, andcertain of 12 the FIA’s legal advisers only. Renault also agreed to put forward Witness X for interview by one of the FIA’s external counsel, Mr Paul Harris. To protect his identity Witness X is not identified in this decision.

With Renault’s cooperation, Witness X was subjected to detailed interview and examination. The interview established to the satisfaction of the FIA’s legal advisers that Renault F1’s description of the evidence of Witness X in Renault F1’s written submissions of 17 September 2009 was accurate. As a result of the interview, the FIA put a number of additional questions to Renault F1’s lawyers. On 19 September 2009, Renault F1 made a third and final set of written submissions. In those submissions, Renault F1 stated as follows:
“Renault F1 has concluded that the following had knowledge of the conspiracy to cause a safety car: Nelson Piquet Junior, Pat Symonds, Flavio Briatore and [Witness X]. [Witness X] was told of the idea suggested by Nelson Piquet Junior by Mr Symonds, whilst in the presence of Mr Briatore. [Witness X] objected to the idea. He did not know the plan was to be carried into effect until the crash happened. As a result of the evidence, including Mr Piquet's admission, Mr Symond's responses and [Witness X’s] evidence, Renault F1 concluded that they and Mr Briatore must have known about the conspiracy.”

When the FIA’s advisers interviewed Witness X, he expressly confirmed that Mr Briatore was involved in the conspiracy because Witness X had been personally present at a meeting shortly after qualifying on Saturday 27 September 2008 when Mr Symonds had mentioned the possibility of a crash plan to Mr Briatore. The FIA’s advisers were confident that Witness X himself played no active role in the conspiracy and that, indeed, he had objected to it and sought to distance himself from it.

[Ed]

The FIA documentation also revealed Pat Symonds' letter expressing regret. Symonds wrote:

“In mitigation I would like to acknowledge my role in this incident. I was the one who, when the idea was first suggested to me by Nelson Piquet Jr., should have dismissed it immediately. It is to my eternal regret and shame that I did not do so. I can only say that I did it out of a misguided devotion to my team and not for any personal gain whatsoever. I consider the role I have played in bringing the team to where it is today to be my life’s work. I started the nucleus of the team 28 years ago with only 19 other people. Today it has grown to an organisation that directly employs over 500 people and supports innumerable local and international businesses. The last thing that I ever wanted to do was to jeopardise that team and the many people to whom I had an overwhelming responsibility. In a single action I have destroyed the high reputation I have built up during a 33 year career in motor sport. I am a competitive person who worked in a high pressure environment. This can, at times, cloud one’s judgement. I have always tried to be an honest person, a fact I hope you will give me credit for by witness of my statements to the stewards in Belgium. On that night in Singapore last year I made a mistake the consequences of which I could never have imagined at the time. For that mistake I can only offer all of you, and all those touched by the action I was involved in, my profound apology.”

[Ed]

On Piquet's role,

In his statements, Mr Piquet Jnr claims that the crash plan was first put to him by Mr Symonds and Mr Briatore at a meeting on the Sunday afternoon immediately prior to the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. Mr Piquet Jnr repeated that same version of events before the WMSC. Mr Symonds claimed both at interview and in his letter of 20 September 2009 to the WMSC that Mr Piquet Jnr had made the initial suggestion of the crash plan to Mr Symonds. The WMSC has thus received differing accounts of which party had the original idea to stage a deliberate crash, but does not consider it necessary to reach a formal conclusion on who first proposed the idea. This is, in the WMSC’s view, immaterial as the breaches of the International Sporting Code and the Formula One Sporting Regulations arise from the execution of the crash plan itself.

Mr Piquet Jnr was informally advised before making his statement on 30 July 2009 that he would benefit from immunity from individual sanction in the event that he cooperated fully with the FIA's investigation and gave a detailed account that was true to the best of his knowledge and belief. This conditional offer of immunity was formalised in a letter dated 25 August 2009 from the FIA President to Mr Piquet Jnr. The WMSC considers in this instance that Mr Piquet Jnr has complied with the conditions attached to the offer of immunity and should therefore be exempt from individual FIA sanctions under the International Sporting Code. The WMSC also considers that, as a matter of policy, those in a position to inform the FIA of serious breaches of its rules should be encouraged to come forward with all relevant evidence and that, in order to secure this aim, Mr Piquet Jnr should be afforded the immunity initially offered to him.

The WMSC notes, however, that by conspiring with Mr Briatore and Mr Symonds to effect the crash plan, Mr Piquet Jnr showed a shameful disregard for the safety of spectators, officials and his fellow competitors and his actions are worthy of the heaviest censure. While the WMSC accepts that Mr Piquet Jnr appears to have been subject to unfavourable treatment at the hands of his team principal and manager, Mr Briatore, the WMSC must note, nonetheless (as Mr Piquet Jnr accepted in his submissions to the WMSC), that he could have - and should have - refused to carry out the crash plan.

[Ed]

On Alonso's role;

In light of Mr Alonso's experience as a racing driver, it was widely rumoured that Mr Alonso must have known of the crash plan. It was alleged by commentators (though not by Mr Piquet Jnr, Mr Symonds, Mr Briatore or any current Renault employee), that the strategy for Mr Alonso's car (of fuelling light from the back of the grid on a street circuit) was so unusual that he would have been bound to have questioned the strategy and only accepted it if he had been told in advance about the crash plan.

Mr Alonso was invited to appear at the WMSC meeting of 21 September 2009 for two main reasons. First, at the time of the investigation, the FIA's investigations were continuing (particularly with regard to Witness X). As such, it was not clear whether any additional allegations would be made regarding Mr Alonso. Second, the FIA considered that, in light of the nature of the rumours regarding Mr Alonso's state of knowledge regarding the conspiracy, it would be of assistance to the WMSC and Mr Alonso for him to appear and answer any questions the WMSC may have.

Consistent with his remarks at interview on 27 August 2009, Mr Alonso denied having had any knowledge of the crash plan. The WMSC has not been presented with any evidence whatsoever suggesting that Mr Alonso knew of the crash plan or knowingly assisted in its execution and the WMSC accepts Mr Alonso’s evidence.

[mlittle]

The FIA have released the complete dossier of the Renault crash-gate scandal. It can be found at the FIA website here

.................. The documentation reveals a witness from within Renault (only identified as Witness X) who confirmed that Piquet Jr, Symonds and Briatore conspired to crash deliberately.

In those additional submissions, Renault F1 referred to the existence of another member of the Renault F1 team (“Witness X”) who, although not a conspirator himself, knew of the conspiracy at the time of the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. Renault F1 stated in its submissions of 17 September 2009 that Witness X had confirmed that Mr Briatore had known of the deliberate crash plan before it had been put into effect.

Renault F1 submitted that Witness X was a ‘whistleblower’ within its team and that if his identity were to be revealed it may discourage other similarly situated persons to come forward in relation to this or other matters. The FIA considered this argument to have some merit, given that Witness X was said not himself to be a conspirator. However, the FIA considered that this argument had to be balanced against the requirements of the FIA’s investigation and the requirement to put the full facts before the WMSC. The FIA therefore agreed with Renault F1 that the identity of Witness X would be made known to the FIA’s President, andcertain of 12 the FIA’s legal advisers only. Renault also agreed to put forward Witness X for interview by one of the FIA’s external counsel, Mr Paul Harris. To protect his identity Witness X is not identified in this decision.

With Renault’s cooperation, Witness X was subjected to detailed interview and examination. The interview established to the satisfaction of the FIA’s legal advisers that Renault F1’s description of the evidence of Witness X in Renault F1’s written submissions of 17 September 2009 was accurate. As a result of the interview, the FIA put a number of additional questions to Renault F1’s lawyers. On 19 September 2009, Renault F1 made a third and final set of written submissions. In those submissions, Renault F1 stated as follows:
“Renault F1 has concluded that the following had knowledge of the conspiracy to cause a safety car: Nelson Piquet Junior, Pat Symonds, Flavio Briatore and [Witness X]. [Witness X] was told of the idea suggested by Nelson Piquet Junior by Mr Symonds, whilst in the presence of Mr Briatore. [Witness X] objected to the idea. He did not know the plan was to be carried into effect until the crash happened. As a result of the evidence, including Mr Piquet's admission, Mr Symond's responses and [Witness X’s] evidence, Renault F1 concluded that they and Mr Briatore must have known about the conspiracy.”

When the FIA’s advisers interviewed Witness X, he expressly confirmed that Mr Briatore was involved in the conspiracy because Witness X had been personally present at a meeting shortly after qualifying on Saturday 27 September 2008 when Mr Symonds had mentioned the possibility of a crash plan to Mr Briatore. The FIA’s advisers were confident that Witness X himself played no active role in the conspiracy and that, indeed, he had objected to it and sought to distance himself from it.

Okay.........so who is Witness X?

According to a story over at Yahoo/Eurosport, Permane is Witness X, Witness X has been identified by sources over at The Daily Mail as Renault chief race engineer Alan Permane, who provided testimony to the FIA in its' investigation of "Crash-Gate" from the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. This makes sense, for as chief engineer, Permane would've been in the middle of any conversation involving former Renault driver Nelson Piquet, Jr., former Renault team principal Flavio Briatore and Renault Engineering Director Pat Symonds. Quoting from the above article..............

Renault F1 referred to the existence of another member of the Renault F1 team who, although not a conspirator himself, knew of the conspiracy at the time of the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. When the FIA's advisors interviewed Witness X, he expressly confirmed that Mr. Briatore was involved in the conspiracy because Witness X had been personally present at a meeting shortly after qualifying on Saturday 27 September 2008 when Mr. Symonds had mentioned the possibility of a crash plan to Mr. Briatore. Witness X confirmed that Mr. Briatore had known of the deliberate crash plan before it had been put into effect. (Witness X) was told of the idea suggested by Nelson Piquet Jr by Mr. Symonds, whilst in the presence of Mr. Briatore. (Witness X) objected to the idea... and sought to distance himself from it. He did not know the plan was to be carried into effect until the crash happened. As a result of the evidence, including Mr. Piquet's admission, Mr. Symonds's responses and (Witness X's) evidence, Renault F1 concluded that they and Mr. Briatore must have known about the conspiracy.

This makes sense for two reasons...................(1)as chief race engineer for Renault, Permane would be involved in all meetings pertaining to strategy for both qualifying and the race; any decisions made by either Messrs. Briatore and/or Symonds would likely pass through Permane down to each driver's engineer and to both Alonso and PK, Jr, respectively.....(2)unlike the rumors pointing towards Fernando Alonso as Witness X, Alonso wouldn't have been in a position to confirm any of the testimony presented as the article above mentions; this points back towards the team's engineers and Permane specifically.

FWIW, don't be surprised if Permane's with another team next year......who knows, maybe Ferrari will sign him to work with Alonso(if the Alonso to Ferrari rumors do pan out............)