F1 » Singapore-gate 'Witness X' identity revealed

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest


September 29, 2009 2:34 PM

the real question is, why did he wait for a year to come forth? and this happened on the night before the hearing, yet mosley has said that the decision had been made , also before the hearing.

Geno - USA - Unregistered

September 29, 2009 3:00 PM

Alan P is certainly a credible witness. Then you have Pat Symonds non-denial and the Flavio no-show to the hearing.

Add to that the radio transmissions and telemetry - what is Flavio going to appeal? Keep this fat, cheating fool out of the sport.

Richard and Alan are desperately clinging to their original theory of events. (totally unsupported by the evidence, but who cares about that when their love of everything Fernando is so compelling)

I'm sure they will come out of the cave someday, but we are wasting our time trying to talk sense to them.


September 29, 2009 3:45 PM

Geno, rich ard is not an Alonso fan. He is stating that with all the mis information going about that it would be nice to see real facts in a real court. Not some Max kangaroo court where evidence can be made real. Maybe Flav is guilty but looking at what has been offered so far doesn't make Flav guilty. Piquet is just as guilty if not more than Flav. And now Piquet says FA ran the team. They are pissed that NP can no longer run in F1 as no one will have him. And as he said this is not over. So why not wait to hear all the FACTS instead of what Piquet has to say. Piquet crash into the wall as he was the only one in the car. And as I said before. Flav may be guilty.


September 29, 2009 5:05 PM

geno,i have put forward no theory, only stated the facts as leaked to us. i am neither for or against briatore or alonso, but all i am saying is, that every day, there are new revelations which pour doubt on the whole process and event. not saying othing happened, but that all is not as it seems.

Jason - Unregistered

September 29, 2009 5:31 PM

TheBull - It does state that, but other articles have stated the Permane (witness X) was not in the same meeting as Nelson. So, meeting 1 occurred between NP, FB, and PS. Then meeting 2 occurred between FB, PS, and AP, where PS said it was Nelson's idea. In other words, Permane didn't hear it from the horse's mouth, but he knows Flavio was in the room when the idea was discussed.

Page 1 of 3
1 2 3  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2016 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.