Given that definition it seems somewhat ironic that the German courts have accepted a payment of $100m to end the Bernie Ecclestone bribery trail! That means no decision was reached on the allegations and Ecclestone is considered neither guilty nor innocent. It is the ultimate 'Get out of jail' card with a potential ten years imprisonment wiped off the slate. Of course, in the eyes of UK law he is obviously innocent as not proven guilty.
While $100m seems like a gigantic amount of money, when that is set against Eccleston's estimated wealth of $4.2bn, it is a mere drop in the ocean, but a gross waste of money if he would have been proved innocent.
What interests me though is whether this creates a precedent for future bribery trials? Would a proportionate amount be acceptable to 'close' the case in a procurement bribery case? Would it be worth corrupt firms setting aside such monies rather than going through the courts and being 'blacklisted' from future contracts? Would the precedent apply to individuals facing allegations of bribery?