Soldato
It’s basically no punishment isn’t it
Motorsport Off Topic Thread
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
He's 92 - for non-violent crimes, nobody at that age will get sent to prison.
Caporegime
Fair point.
Rather makes a mockery of this -
If £400 million isn't egregious, then not sure what is.
If £400 million isn't egregious, then not sure what is.
Caporegime
Lots of rumours going around that Pérez will announce his retirement from the sport at the Mexican GP (that's on the 29th October). Apparently he was told at Japan he's going to be replaced. My guess is that he'll be allowed to retire with Red Bull trying to present it as his decision so that he doesn't get the dishonour of being kicked out of the team.
I posted a link to a 53 year old who stole £50k in benefits, they went to prison for 16.5 weeks with another 16.5 weeks on licence.
The bold is of course my emphasis but the judge felt that the scale of the £50k was worth jail time. But don't worry, if you are a billionaire its all good right?
Age is utterly irrelevant IMO and people like Ecclestone (extremely rich, powerful and high profile) should have the book thrown at them, not doing so just signals to others like him that it is ok to do what he did. Likewise it just further embeds notion that people with big money can make the problems go away.
Did the 53 year old pay it back including interest and a hefty penalty on top? Ecclestone's age, frail health and significant settlement were all factors in why he avoided prison. £330m out of the £672m settlement was the penalty he agreed to. The best way to discourage others from doing the same is to hit them in the pocket. Would it really be in the public interest to risk hundreds of millions just to send a 92 year old to prison?
Last edited:
Associate
You send him to prison and recover the money.
That sounds like a good rumour that someone’s just made up
In all seriousness, it doesn’t correlate with what the xenophobe said in the last few days about assessing his performance in the next two races 
But I can believe RB have knocked him down so much he just wants to throw in the towel completely.
This.
The punishment for proper tax evasion is a joke, particularly compared to benefit fraud which is usually a fraction of the scale. Money out and money failing to come in amounts to the exact same thing.
We’re not talking about accidentally transposing a number on a tax return, he knowingly misled HMRC over his offshore trusts. Tax evasion is a more polite way of saying fraud and it is ultimately fraud. He also wasn’t 92 when he committed the act.
If he defrauded someone else what wasn’t the government or bribed someone should he also avoid prison because he is 92?
Caporegime
That sounds like a good rumour that someone’s just made up
That's the joy of F1 rumours, innit?
There doesn't seem any place for him to go, tbh. Only Williams might have a spare seat next year, and does Pérez really want that? If he is leaving RB, retirement from F1 seems a good choice for him. He's not an untalented driver, I expect he can find success in a different racing series.
lol I just read it’s literally come from a guy on Reddit who was at some other racing thing in Mexico, talking to a guy at some company that has something to do with sponsorship for Perez. It’d be a stretch, but with the way Perez has been driving he really does look like a broken man. Shame. He seems likeable- but that’s the RB way.That's the joy of F1 rumours, innit?
Marco and his big mouth. )
Last edited:
Allegedly, we'll never know if it was deliberate or not because he decided to settle instead of going through the stress of a trial. There is a risk that the court would have decided it wasn't deliberate and he only pays a small penalty for it. I don't believe it's in the public interest to take that risk just to make an example out of him because he's a billionaire.
He pleaded guilty to knowingly misleading HMRC in a criminal court, if you do something knowingly, it’s deliberate. Re-read the thread and the quotes, his own lawyers stated this to be the case.
He was convicted and now has a criminal record. I’m not sure how much more conclusive you can get than that.
The point we are debating is the sentence, you only get one of those when you are found or plead guilty.
He was convicted and now has a criminal record. I’m not sure how much more conclusive you can get than that.
The point we are debating is the sentence, you only get one of those when you are found or plead guilty.
If you plead guilty to get a reduced sentence and avoid the stress of a trial it doesn't mean you're actually guilty, surely you can't be that naive?
Last edited:
If you’re not guilty, why are you pleading guilty? Someone like Ecclestone has a lot to lose.
This isn’t someone who can’t afford to defend themselves. He’s a billionaire who can afford a team of the best lawyers in the land.
You change your plea to guilty just before the trail is about to start because the disclosure procedure will have completed and frankly his lawyers will have known it’s not looking good. If there was a realistic chance of being found not guilty, you’d go to trial.
This isn’t someone who can’t afford to defend themselves. He’s a billionaire who can afford a team of the best lawyers in the land.
You change your plea to guilty just before the trail is about to start because the disclosure procedure will have completed and frankly his lawyers will have known it’s not looking good. If there was a realistic chance of being found not guilty, you’d go to trial.
Last edited:
If you're a 92 year old multi billionaire in frail health and the final few years or months of your life, why would you put yourself through the stress of a criminal trial when you could just pay a penalty that makes no difference to you? The trial was based on misleading HMRC in 2015 when he was 84, clearly there would've been a strong argument to be made that it wasn't a deliberate lie but rather a result of cognitive decline from his advanced age.
He's got very good lawyers and would've been advised there's no chance he's going to prison if he pays the settlement and pleads guilty. There's no way he would've plead guilty if he believed there was a realistic chance he would go to prison.
Ecclestone's lawyer, Clare Montgomery KC, said that it was never her client's intention to avoid paying tax and he was simply unaware of the true position of his affairs at the time.
'He simply didn't know the answer to HMRC's question and he should have said 'I don't know' instead of 'no',' she added.
'He is now in frail health; the whole process has caused immense stress to him and those who love him, and the reality is he has been living under investigation for over a decade.'
Professor Charles Knight had told judge Bryan that Ecclestone suffers from coronary heart disease, hypertension and diabetes.
His risk of death within 12 months was 30 per cent, with the stress of a trial doubling this - meaning 'on the balance of probabilities the chance of death during the period of the proceedings is over 50 per cent,' Prof Knight had said.
Last edited: