Taken from
ITV-F1.com
News
Ferrari ponders further action in spy case
Ferrari is considering appealing against the FIAs decision not to impose a penalty on McLaren in the spying case.
The World Motor Sport Council ruled last Thursday that McLaren had contravened article 151c of Formula 1s sporting code because its chief designer Mike Coughlan possessed confidential Ferrari technical documents.
But it deemed there was insufficient evidence that the team had used or benefited from the information to warrant any kind of penalty.
Ferrari was deeply aggrieved at the verdict, describing it as incomprehensible that McLaren could be found guilty as charged and yet escape without sanction.
Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo has warned that the story will not end here and, in a lengthy response published on the teams website, CEO Jean Todt said the team does not rule out further action in addition to the ongoing legal cases against Nigel Stepney and Mike Coughlan in Italy and England.
This decision remains very disappointing and surprising, Todt said.
It is not acceptable to create a precedent in such an important case in which the guilty verdict for serious and persistent violation of the fundamental principle of sporting honesty does not automatically incur a penalty.
For our part, we will press on with the legal actions currently taking place in Italy and in England, and we do not rule out taking further action.
Todt said the fact McLaren that questioned Ferraris compliance with the bodywork regulations at the start of the season and called for a clarification of the rules was attributable to inside knowledge of his teams designs.
And he claimed the more stringent bodywork deflection tests subsequently introduced which were believed to hurt Ferrari more than other teams showed that McLaren had gained an advantage even if it had not incorporated Ferrari designs on its own car.
During [the WMSC] meeting, the McLaren bosses, with no exceptions, admitted that their chief designer had obtained since back in March, prior to the Australian GP, documents from Nigel Stepney, said Todt.
Some of this data was used to prepare a clarification request submitted to the FIA, aimed clearly at us, given that throughout the Melbourne weekend, the McLaren team principal and his closest colleagues made statements in which they threw doubt over some cars.
Therefore, such information was in fact used to obtain an advantage over us: not through an improvement in their performance, but instead through limiting ours.
It is important to underline that the information used to try and damage Ferrari through the FIA might be only a part of the information received by McLaren.
Todt argued that possession of leaked information was sufficient grounds for a penalty, and said it was unreasonable for the burden of proof to lie with Ferrari.
As confirmed in that decision yesterday, the violation was already there in the simple possession of the information, which in itself constitutes an enormous advantage in a sport like Formula 1, he said.
In Ferraris opinion, it is like playing a hand of poker with a rival who already knows what cards you are holding.
It remains incomprehensible that apart from possession, one must also demonstrate the effective and visible use of this information on the McLaren car.
Actually, this very same fact, on the basis of available information which the FIA used to find McLaren guilty, shows that the offence lies in the possession without the need to prove anything else.
The proof is there and this led to the FIAs decision. Therefore I find it difficult to understand how the verdict makes sense.
Furthermore, I have to say that the proof of effective use requested by the FIA is impossible for Ferrari to furnish, because of course, Ferrari does not have access to the McLaren car.
Todt accused McLaren boss Ron Dennis of reneging on an understanding they had reached to establish a better working relationship between the two arch-rival teams.
A few weeks after the race in Melbourne, the McLaren team principal proposed that we should reach a sort of agreement to establish a better relationship between our two teams, thus avoiding any future denunciations to the sporting authority, Todt said.
I replied that I found it impossible to believe him, because on several occasions we had seen that certain commitments had always been disregarded by McLaren.
There was an exchange of views and, believing in their good faith, I agreed to sign this agreement on 9th June last.
Since that time and even earlier, McLaren was perfectly aware, not only of the emails sent by their informer within our company, but also of the fact that their chief designer had stayed in contact with him and had received and continued to be in possession of a significant amount of technical information that belonged to us.
So, on the one hand, they had come to say let us trust one another, and on the other they were hiding serious facts such as those just stated above, but making no effort to inform us as would have been in the spirit and to the letter of our agreement.
-----------------------------------
Ferrari make a very vaild point I do think this is far from over
