The trial of Bernard Laporte opened on Wednesday in Paris for suspicions of favoritism involving in particular the multi-billionaire businessman Mohed Altrad, main financier of the XV of France.
The second day of hearing will have made it possible to hear the president of the FFR, who refutes all the charges brought against him.
At the 32nd correctional chamber,
We know how to laugh in the Laporte clan.
When he entered room 2.12 of the Paris court, on this second day of the so-called Altrad-Laporte trial, the president of the French Rugby Federation struggled to be recognized by the police officer responsible for pointing out new arrivals.
His lawyer, Mr. Versini-Campinchi is then responsible for making the presentations.
"It's Mr. Bernard Laporte, the one who will go to prison," he dares to quip, when we know that his client faces a ten-year prison sentence and a fine of one million euros.
At his side, the boss of the FFR, he laughs a little less.
Without necessarily appearing tense, he looks closed.
And for good reason.
After a day of Wednesday suspended for procedural questions and during which he could not finally be heard, the former coach of the XV of France was expected Thursday at the bar to finally answer the accusations of... [we take his breathing]... illegal taking of interest, breach of trust, forgery and use of forgery, abuse of corporate assets, corruption and influence peddling.
Sitting a few rows from him, the four other co-defendants, including Mohed Altrad, the wealthy entrepreneur / president of the Montpellier rugby club and jersey sponsor of the France team, with whom he is suspected by the National Financial Prosecutor's Office (PNF) of conflicts of interest.
“Give back to rugby what rugby gave me”
Called to the bar after the loooooooong monologue of the president (more than 1h30), who undertook to recall by menu the chronology of the facts alleged against the accused, Bernard Laporte announces the color of entry.
“I reject all the charges as a whole and I will take the time to explain to you why”, he warns, before recalling in preliminary the reasons why he decided to run for the presidency of the FFR in 2016.
Reasons that can be summarized as follows: to restore power to small amateur clubs, deprived of a voice in the chapter under his predecessor, to restore financial means to them, "balloons, chasubles" he explains, and "to restore life to our French team ".
Insisting on his role as volunteer president, Laporte assures hand on heart that he has chosen to leave the professional world and his managerial position in Toulon "to give back to rugby what rugby has given me".
Understand: it is not a question of big money for him here, but rather of sacrificing himself for the good and the revival of French rugby.
This will more or less be his line of defense throughout this trial if we understand correctly.
After a brief presentation of the stages of his life which led him from his small club of Gaillac to the presidency of the Fédé, at the request of the president - we will thus learn that the young Bernard was hired by the fire-EDF after the obtaining his F3 electrical engineering baccalaureate – the debates finally turn on what he is accused of after meticulous investigation by the Brigade for the repression of economic crime (BRDE).
Namely a supposed favoritism for the attribution of the jersey sponsorship of the XV of France to Altrad as well as a divine intervention with the appeal committee of the FFR to attenuate the disciplinary sanctions against the MHR, at the end of June 2017. All this in as a dismissal after the juicy contract signed by the company BL Communication (for Bernard Laporte Communication) for four seminars in the
A conflict of interest, what conflict of interest?
The time that will be given to him to answer the flood of questions from the president, his elevators, the two PNF magistrates, the prosecutors and the various lawyers, Bernard Laporte will use it to explain that he does not see how the fact to sign an image contract with AIA, the company of Mohed Altrad, can be perceived as a conflict of interest.
“I did not sign this contract as president of the FFR,” he asserted several times.
“Yet this is what is stipulated in the contract”, the president is surprised, to which Mr. Laporte replies: “I am not a lawyer”.
“But you had him consulted by a lawyer, right?
“, she engages.
“Yes, but we didn't do an in-depth 4-hour study!
“replies the former rugby player, still as solid on his feet.
“You are not very curious!,
she exclaims back.
Less than this court in any case ”.
Drop the mic'
.
Invited to intervene, prosecutor Céline Guillet is surprised in another register of missing salary declarations for almost six months, between January and June 2016, with the High Authority for the transparency of public life, while Bernard Laporte was still under contract with the RCT.
"Is it a mistake, Mr. Laporte?"
“, asks the magistrate.
"No doubt", sweeps the (dis)interested.
The president widens her eyes: “But it's important Mr. Laporte!
".
Without a doubt.
M.Laporte on the said charter: “I haven't read it but I suspect what it says.
It must not be different from that of football”
The president: “You are not going to tell me that you have read that of football and not that of rugby all the same?!
(We have a good laugh
)
– Aymeric Le Gall (@AymericLeGall) September 8, 2022
Access to this content has been blocked to respect your choice of consent
By clicking on "
I ACCEPT
", you accept the deposit of cookies by external services and will thus have access to the content of our partners
I ACCEPT
And to better remunerate 20 Minutes, do not hesitate to accept all cookies, even for one day only, via our "I accept for today" button in the banner below.
More information on the Cookie Management Policy page.
At the same time, the ethics and professional conduct charter dated 2015 will also be discussed;
charter that Bernard Laporte will admit never having read (true story).
The prosecutor will then take care of doing it for him: “The leaders of sports organizations perform their duties with integrity, integrity, impartiality and transparency.
They prevent any conflict of interest ', he will read aloud before returning to the defendant and asking him: What do you think Mr. Laporte?
".
"I think it's good," replied the person concerned.
“So, perfect!
“, overplays the proc '.
Amused giggles in the audience.
“Because I have no conflict of interest and I will explain myself,” repeats Laporte, for the two at the back of the room who have not yet understood.
The president's assessor then intervenes to ask her for a definition of a conflict of interest.
"It's… Uh… For example if I'm…", Laporte stammers a few barely audible words before a new question on a completely different subject comes to get him out of trouble.
But who is “Deep Throat”?
This is what we will remember from this second day of trial: with so many cases in one, the magistrates lit on all sides, at the risk of complicating the understanding of an already hairy file for the neurons.
Here a question about his relations with the National Rugby League and its president at the time, Paul Goze, there a second about his means of subsistence because of his voluntary function at the FFR (he assured that he was unemployed for three years ), yet another, from his lawyer, on the identity of "deep throat", the ugly journalistic source having leaked the case to the Journal du Dimanche in August 2017.
Finally, after a quick look at the accounts (often in the red, according to his own accountant) of the company BL Communication, Bernard Laporte will conclude by ensuring that he has reimbursed the full 180,000 euros to Mohed Altrad's company, without really convincing the president, quite lost in the various statements of account provided by the defense.
This will finally suspend the session after three hours of punch hearing.
It will certainly take many more to shed light on a case which, in two days of trial, will have finally been barely touched upon.
Sport
Rugby: The labor inspectorate seized on the "social climate" of the organization of the 2023 World Cup
Sport
Laporte-Altrad trial: “Where are the fadettes?
“, the pundits of French rugby for the moment spared
Sport
Rugby
Mohed Altrad
Montpellier Rugby
Bernard Laporte
XV of France
Court case