The ING Renault F1 team, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Renault SA, says that it has initiated criminal action against Nelson Piquet and his eponymous son, the former Renault driver. This is not possible and Renault lawyers in Paris would know this, which makes the statement seem very odd indeed.
The Renault statement says that “the ING Renault F1 Team and its managing director Flavio Briatore personally, wish to state that they have commenced criminal proceedings against Nelson Piquet Junior and Nelson Piquet Senior in France, concerning the making of false allegations and a related attempt to blackmail the team into allowing Mr Piquet Jr to drive for the remainder of the 2009 season. The matter will also be referred to the police in the UK.”
In French law it is not possible for a private individual or a company to commence criminal proceedings. All they can do is to claim that a crime has been committed and ask the authorities to investigate. These claims will then be examined in a judicial investigation, which will be performed by police, working for a law officer known as a “Procureur de la Republique”. The procureur wil look at the evidence put forward and will decide whether it is in the public interest to take the case further. If the claims are deemed to have substance then a criminal procedure will be initiated with a summons being issued.
The team is up before the FIA World Council on September 21 to answer the charge that it organised for Piquet Jr to crash in order to get a Safety Car and thus help Fernando Alonso to win the Singapore GP. Much of the evidence against Renault has been leaked to the media and it is clear from this that it is going to be an interesting case. It remains to be seen whether or not the FIA has further evidence that has yet to come to light, but it is interesting to theorise on the subject of whether the Piquets would have embarked on the current course of action if there was the slightest chance that they would lose. This seems very unlikely as there is little to be gained in taking a risk that might go wrong.
Briatore has apparently been able to convince Renault management in Paris that he is the victim in this affair. There is a very real danger that by doing this the French manufacturer will create a rod for its own back. The FIA clearly does not want to see the French company leaving the sport – if only because the engines are needed in F1 – but if Renault is supporting Briatore then it is likely that the company will be deemed to be in league with the team and thus if ING Renault is found guilty the FIA might feel obliged to punish the parent company in the same way – based on its long-established rules of collective responsibility.
The outcome of these claims is that the crash was deliberate, it is only the blame that is in doubt.
Following on from Joe’s collective responsibility comment, Piquet was contracted to Renault, thus although he may have immunity from FIA punishment, Renault (through their representative, one N. A. Piquet) are still responsible (in the way McLaren were responsible for de la Rosa/Alonso’s actions in 2007) for causing an avoidable crash that put spectators, other drivers and marshalls at risk e.g. flying wheels caused a marshall’s death in Melbourne in 2001; recent flying debris/wheel events need no further reminder.
I can’t image Briatore’s management company will be working too hard to find Piquet another drive after this…
I think it will be very hard to prove that he was ordered to do it unless Piquet has a recording of the meeting. Would Piquet have gone to the FIA knowing it was his word against theirs without additional proof?
As if Mosley wasn’t bizarre enough.
However, it is getting more and more evident that something went down the morning of the Singapore race. It appears it will boil down to the question of who thought the prank up: Little Piquet (as Symonds asserts), or Symonds.
Briatore, smiling like a greased pig, has wiggled away for the time being. The dude’s talents are indeed impressive.
The burden of proof will likely fall most heavily on Piquet (unless as suggested the FIA has more than what has been revealed). He is “the disgruntled former employee” here. And there does also seem to be some stink of “honor” behind all this, which is not always the best motive for sticking your neck out as far the Piquets have done.
The mud is getting deeper, and more of it is sticking… This is very nasty stuff.
The ING Renault F1 team is based in England, no?
[...] it is taking legal action against Nelson Piquet Jnr. This in itself may not be all it seems, as Joe Saward explains: This is not possible and Renault lawyers in Paris would know this, which makes the statement seem [...]
Joe, I was wondering:
1. Is the Renault race fixing allegations really that different from Senna and Schumacher, who both caused deliberate crashes to influence the outcome of not just a race, but the championship? You will know better about the exact Grand Prix and the circumstances surrounding these, but I’m not convinced that these were decisions taken by the two drivers alone. Surely these incident must have been discussed with the engineers in charge at the time.
2. How many times did Nelson Piquet Jr crash during his brief F1 career?
3. Who, without exception, is the most unpopular child on the playground? This one I’ll answer: It’s the snitch, the tattletale, the little shit who spills the beans because he can’t get everything to go his way. There’s no honour among thieves (even race thieves), now is there…
I look forward to you sharing your thoughts.
Wilhelm
Great article, thanks for the lesson in French law.
This is indeed a fixating case coming up.
My thoughts ? GUILTY and will be proven as such. They will be excluded from Formula 1 championships until 2015 and fined 10 million dollars