You are absolutely right ! My own experience from travelling in France last year. Our vehicle, parked at a busy Petrol station on the motorway while we were eating, is attacked in broad daylight by 2 individuals who break the windows and run away with 2 pieces of luggage (laptop and camera). People give chase to the 2 thieves picked up by an accomplice in a car, as they run away. That happens all the time, we are told. Two gendarmes on motorcycles are found "resting" at the cafetaria. Alerted, they refuse to chase the vehicle in question, in spite of witnesses giving description of the vehicle and registration, saying they are on TRAFFIC PATROL that day, and it's not their jurisdiction ! We are told to report (porter plainte) to the police station at the next town. Once we locate it, we are asked to bring witnesses to corroborate our claim, which finally isn't accepted. British car, British driving licence, so I am now treated like a tourist idiot. I understand from the conversation the officers have between them, there is a conflict between the Gendarmerie and the Police. Having lost 4 hours in the ordeal, we leave after being told to claim the loss from our insurance. Result: NO CRIME REPORTED. A perfect exemple of the complete lack of interest from both the Gendarmes and the Police to work together to tackle crime.
Gaslighting - the other French pastime. As the comments at that Twitter link I posted illustrate, they probably blamed certain others also. Next time, tell the gendarmes that you will defend your property and yourself with force if necessary. Enjoy their magically rediscovered diligence. The "not recommended" way of dealing with all that nonsense https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Family_(2013_film)
Times like these you seriously wonder why anyone bothers paying tax at all. If the civil servants can't be bothered doing their job, why should I bother paying their salary? Meanwhile, France wonders why their country is on fire half the time.
Come on Bas...a clever fellow like you should know better! Nobody wonders: it is a national tradition. Actually, it is when the country is NOT on fire that I'm bothered. I'm waiting for the Olympics in Paris next year... Rgds
As a Frenchman, I feel somehow responsible, and very disappointed and embarassed for you, William. Won't comment further (it would derail the thread further and verge on P&R), but this is disgraceful. Rgds
...that you would as well have done without. I'm pretty tired of the habit introduced a few years ago to call these things "incivilités" (uncivilities). These are agressions and should be dealt by the law enforcement forces as such. Rgds
I don't think you have an ombudsman office in France to complain to in cases like mine. Nor do I know who the police, or civil servants, are answerable to. I know only how these work in UK.
You wouldn't have someone with a field of investigation as extended as the ombudsman in the U.K, but you have the "Défenseur des droits" when you are dealing with an administration, or the "conciliateur de justice" when two parties are involved in a local dispute, such as the usual problems of neighborhood, etc... The Police, like any civil servant, is answerable to their hierachy, ultimately to the Directeur Général de la Police, who is himself to the "Ministre de l'Intérieur". The "Gendarmes", being Military, to their commanding officer, usually the one in charge of the brigade de département; and ultimately to the Général commanding the Gendarmerie Nationale (who is himself to the "Ministre de la Défense") Rgds
In UK, we have the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to deal with complaints against the police . In any police station, it's widely publicised how you can file a complaint of misconduct against the police. As to my question; in France the police is answerable to the state, in UK our constabulary is answerable to the public.
Here we are getting back to the core of the perspective regarding the different conception of the Law: France is a centralised State, and always had been; with all the advantages and drawbacks of such a consideration: we despise the State and hate it, but also expect absolute neutrality from it (and for some of us: expect EVERYTHING from it). We are satisfied with it, perhaps also because all the attempts at "decentralisation" since 1982 have only brought local nepotism and cronyism. It is very difficult to make the transition from one system and its logic to another... I have been once, for a whole week, in front of an arbitration court in London; assisted by a reputable international Lawyers firm in London, but never felt so much out of my waters...interesting, yes; challenging? you bet. Did I understand exactly every implication behind each word? Well...no. Rgds
I know that France is a centralise state, based on jacobinism from the Revolution. What you have now with the 5th Republic is bonapartisme. When I travelled in the USSR years ago, they were proud to tell me their "democratic centralism" came from the French jacobinism, to justify their authoritarian regime. Robespierre was actually a hero there. No wonder their country has been ruled by tyrants since 1917! Britain may look old fashion with its monarchy, but we are in fact well protected from abuse of power (like your 49.3) by our parliamentary democracy, and we can change our executive at will.
Not just an inconvenience. It's Corruption and it permeates and destroys all levels of society. BTW - they were legally obligated to take your complaint. They can't say no. As you well know, they're experts at gaslighting and doing nothing. Forget the street thugs. They're just symptoms of the real issue. So go after the big guys, the mairie, the establishments where the stuff happens, the police etc. Costs some money and time but 5 years down the road you'll have the satisfaction of knowing you did the right thing, not just for yourself but others as well. That's priceless and timeless.
@lagunacc Not just an inconvenience. It's Corruption and it permeates and destroys all levels of society. BTW - they were legally obligated to take your complaint. They can't say no. As you well know, they're experts at gaslighting and doing nothing. Forget the street thugs. They're just symptoms of the real issue. So go after the big guys, the mairie, the establishments where the stuff happens, the police etc. Costs some money and time but 5 years down the road you'll have the satisfaction of knowing you did the right thing, not just for yourself but others as well. That's priceless and timeless. I know, but I was pushed for time, and we were already late to reach our next hotel, so I left it at that. Also, I don't think I can redress the whole system by my complaint. It has become very hazardous to travel on the continent with GB (now UK) plates on your car. It's not only France, Brits have encountered problems in Spain and Portugal too. I am not vindictive enough to pursue an action that can takes 5 years; I tend to write off my problems very quickly.
I have a good explanation for this. Justice in France is just a catastrophe. They absolutely let down police and gendarmerie by releasing criminals with multiple condamnation. This lack of interest is just demotivated people. Simple as that.
Here we are: UPDATE: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/massas-legal-team-warns-of-uk-high-court-action-over-fia-fom-delays/10513674/ Massa’s legal team warns of UK High Court action over FIA/FOM delays Felipe Massa’s legal team anticipates filing UK High Court action as early as next week if the FIA and FOM delay responding further to its 2008 Formula 1 title claims. By: Jonathan Noble Aug 30, 2023, 10:17 PM As originally reported by Motorsport.com, Massa’s lawyers wrote to FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem and FOM CEO Stefano Domenicali earlier this month with a Letter Before Claim setting out the details of the Brazilian driver’s legal pursuit to rectify him losing the 2008 F1 world championship. According to the document, Massa's legal team alleged the Brazilian was "the victim of a conspiracy" over the Crashgate conspiracy at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. It argued that the FIA and FOM deliberately acted to avoid a scandal over what happened in Singapore, despite being told of the cheating affair early enough to take action. Massa’s push for legal remedy was prompted by both an interview with Bernie Ecclestone claiming that the matter was brushed under the carpet, and an archive chat with former F1 race director Charlie Whiting who revealed he was told about Nelson Piquet Jr’s deliberate Singapore crash at that year’s Brazilian GP season finale. It was suggested that Massa losing the championship as the result of what happened in Singapore had cost him millions in income, as well as ‘moral’ and ‘reputational’ damages. Motorsport.com has learned that both the FIA and FOM have responded to Massa’s original letter. But both have indicated that, in the wake of F1’s summer break period with personnel being away, it was impossible to provide a formal response to the individual claims in the short term so needed more time. That stance has not gone down well with Massa’s team, who have ramped up the urgency to get answers from the FIA and FOM over the matter. Motorsport.com can reveal that Massa’s legal team has now replied to both the FIA and FOM and told them that it does not consider a potential three-month delay for the matter to be dealt with as “reasonable”. The letters, copies of which have been seen by Motorsport.com, argue that: “Work on a response should have begun promptly upon receipt of the Letter Before Claim and summer absences should not have prevented that.” It further states that it does not view any potential delay in dealing with Massa’s request for answers as acceptable. The letters go on to state that, if a formal response is not made by next Friday (8 September), then it expects the matter to go to the UK High Court to force the answers required. “An open-ended timeframe for a response is not consistent with the Pre Action Protocol,” added each letter. “Please provide your response by 4pm on 8 September 2023, failing which we anticipate being instructed to file claims in the UK High Court.” Massa’s legal team want a fast response from both the FIA and FOM because it is poised to launch legal action in other jurisdictions - but feels it better to do so only once it has got the answers to its questions from the FIA and FOM. With the matter going legal, neither FOM nor the FIA wished to make a formal comment on the situation when approached by Motorsport.com. An FIA spokesman said: “The FIA acknowledges receipt of correspondence from representatives of Mr. Felipe Massa. The matter is under review and we will not be providing comment at this stage.”
The "Powers that be" have strongly advised him not to show up in Monza... https://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/fr/formule-1/interdit-de-venir-a-monza-massa-avance-sur-son-action-en-justice-contre-la-f1,184510.html Rgds
Not speculating on the issue (as "they" say in the U.K when each party has drawn his sword: "See you in Court"...) I find the whole situation rather sad. He had the unanimous respect, from everyone (well, that is normal: unanimous = from everyone, isn't it, anyway...) for the fortitude and grace he showed back in 2008. What will result of this for him is anyone's guess, but it certainly will not enhance his reputation. He can only get bitter in the end... Rgds
Bernie opened his mouth. Period. He started this. Massa has a RIGHT to pursue this. Now Charlie Whiting video emerges per this article. Good for Felipe. If he fails he has lost nothing. Bernie, Flavio and others were the losers. F1 should not endure such cheating then cover it up. No major issue as this was agree'd upon mutually - Non issue for the parties involved but makes good cheap press: --Massa is one of several former drivers employed by the F1 organisation in ambassadorial roles, with the job involving attending a certain number of races per season in logoed shirts and undertaking tasks such as meet and greets in the Paddock Club. Others to have similar arrangements are Mika Hakkinen, Jacques Villeneuve and David Coulthard. However, matters became complicated after Massa started a legal process against F1 and the FIA related to the 2008 world championship and the impact of the Singapore GP 'Crashgate' affair on the outcome. As a former Ferrari driver and local favourite, Massa was due to attend this weekend's Italian GP at Monza under his usual arrangement, with travel and hotel expenses taken care of by F1. However, a source has confirmed that a conversation took place during which it was mutually agreed that being at a race as an F1 ambassador was not appropriate in the current circumstances, although it was also made clear that he can continue to come to any race as a private individual. It's understood that Massa himself may have recognised that his presence would inevitably trigger media interest that would have made it hard for him to move around the paddock.--
