Vendée Globe: "No misbehaviour" - Clarisse Crémer and Tanguy Le Turquais without blame
Tatjana Pokorny
· 04.03.2024
The case has caused quite a stir in recent weeks, particularly in France. Clarisse Crémer and her husband Tanguy Le Turquais were alleged to have carried out unauthorised routing during the last Vendée Globe. They were denounced with the help of screenshots of private WhatsApp chats by a person who is still unknown. Both defended themselves loudly and clearly against the allegations. The jury that dealt with the case has now reached an unequivocal verdict. Clarisse Crémer and Tanguy Le Turquais were not guilty of any misconduct.
What the Vendée Globe President says
Alain Leboeuf, President of the Vendée Globe, issued the following statement on the case on 4 March:
"On 12 February this year, the President of the French Sailing Federation (FFVoile) informed me of an anonymous email he had just received accusing Clarisse Crémer of having received routing information from her husband Tanguy Le Turquais during the 2020-2021 Vendée Globe.
Since then, the French Sailing Federation has asked me and the Race Committee to appoint a jury to analyse the veracity of the information and its content. The international jury is firmly convinced that neither Clarisse Crémer nor Tanguy Le Turquais have committed any wrongdoing, and you will understand that it is not for me to comment on a decision by the federal sports authority. I therefore take note of these conclusions, which were reached in complete independence."
The Vendée Globe organisers published the jury decision in "Case 10 of the Vendée Globe 2020" for the hearing under Rule 69.2 of the "Racing Rules of Sailing" on 2 March from 11 am. Clarisse Crémer and Tanguy Le Turquais were present as parties to the protest, and Alan Roberts and Paulin Daraux were present as representatives and advisors elected by the parties. Christian Dumard and Jacques Caraes, the routing expert and weather consultant for the 2020 Vendée Globe race management and the head of race management, were present as witnesses for the parties.
What the international jury says
The publication of the jury's decision states:
"The allegations of misconduct are serious and relate to the principle of the race, namely a solo race without outside help.
The Organising Authority that appointed this international panel under Rule 69.2(k) to decide whether to convene a hearing has actively sought to ensure that this hearing takes place. Rule 69 does not contain a time limit for convening a hearing. Rule 69.2(e) requires that a hearing under rule 69 be consistent with several rules in Part 5 of the Racing Rules relating to protests and requests for redress. No rule relating to time limits is specified as applying.
In this case, the evidence of the images (ed.: screenshots) of WhatsApp messages is just as valid today as it would have been during the 2020-2021 race had it surfaced then. The passage of time has not diminished their significance.
The identity of the person who published the images is not known. The metadata of the images has been removed. There is no further evidence. This does not prevent a hearing under Rule 69 being convened based on the content of the images, with information 'from any source' can be taken into account. The same could happen through unattributed press or television content. In this context, the international jury has satisfied itself that this hearing is being conducted properly.
The international jury then had to decide whether they 'convinced' is that (a) the evidence is genuine and, if so, (b) there has been misconduct. If this is not the case, the allegations are dismissed. In this case, no further enquiry into the status of the images was required as the parties themselves had confirmed in a press release that the images were WhatsApp conversations between them. The hearing was therefore about whether one of the parties had committed misconduct."
The established facts
"The key evidence examined, discussed and questioned was 14 screenshots of WhatsApp messages between Clarisse and Tanguy, from an unknown source and believed to be some of many such messages in the course of authorised communication between Clarisse and Tanguy during the race, using the boat's phone and Tanguy's own phone.
Five pictures contained examples of course pictures created by Tanguy. These were very different parts of the race (crossing the Theta Low, approaching Cape Horn, the return passage of the equator and the finish). The international jury assumes that Tanguy was trying to understand Clarisse's intentions in order to ensure her safety (as a husband) and to answer questions from the media and family. The routes did not include detailed information about wind, swell, time and course options that Clarisse could have adapted for her own use in route planning.
Two images relate to Clarisse who had a problem with her AIS and wanted to check if she was visible on the MarineTraffic website.
The final images relate to Clarisse's expected finish in relation to the poor weather conditions. This issue was addressed by the race committee, who provided advice and weather information to competitors and asked them to coordinate their plans with their teams. For this reason, a WhatsApp group was set up with the race organisers, the boat, the shore team and the weather advisor. The timing of their finish was also important for the media and for personal arrangements. Her boat was several hours behind the previous finisher and several hours ahead of the next boat.
Clarisse's weather model, which was used with the routing programme, was more sophisticated than Tanguy's, and she used it for many hours every day."
Rules and conclusions
Notice of Race (NoR) 4.3.2: Routing definition
"The screenshots do not show that the 'Routing' in the sense of the article has taken place.
Clarisse did not ask Tanguy for advice on routing. She didn't follow any of Tanguy's screenshots. They weren't useful information for her. She was always in possession of better information and had the time to work out her plans."
No. 4.3.3 Performance support
"The screenshots do not show that Clarisse received the performance support described in the article."
NoR 6.4.5: Monitoring of the fleet, exceptional circumstances.
"The race management team applied the NoR article 'Exceptional Circumstances' at the end of the regatta for 'Banque Populaire' to ensure the safety of the competitor and her boat as there were safety concerns due to the strong winds and exceptional weather. This included allowing discussions and options for the finish of 'Banque Populaire'.
Clarisse asked Tanguy for his opinion on their planned finishing route, but this was for safety reasons and included the possibility of deliberately slowing down to avoid low water or a night arrival in the face of bad weather. The race committee had warned all competitors and the shore crews of boats that could be affected of these problems. They therefore received no outside help.
Tanguy had sent Clarisse several course options on his own initiative. The international jury is of the opinion that this was neither wise nor necessary, but accepts that he wanted to give Clarisse clarity about her plans rather than give her advice on what she should do."
Decisions
"Rule 69, Misconduct - The international jury is fully convinced that neither Clarisse Crémer nor Tanguy Le Turquais committed any misconduct.
The allegation of misconduct by Clarisse Crémer is rejected.
The allegation of misconduct by Tanguy Le Turquais is rejected."
So much for the jury's decision. The sailing world assumes that the case is off the table with this judgement. The informant remains unknown.
