It seems Peyper denies Berrys claims, putting doubt on the truthfulness of Berry's testimony.
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/jaco...a-nic-berry-claim-referee-erasmus-springboks/
Maine Takeaway
Their detailed evidence was
set out in the post-hearing document published by the judicial committee. In it, it outlined what was said at the hearing by Berry and fellow referee Peyper. “I’m able to get Jaco on the phone,” said Berry. “We speak for ten minutes. He tells me that Rassie has called him and wants him to comment on the clips.
“Jaco refuses and said that it is unprofessional and out of protocol. He says that Rassie is putting AJ Jacobs under pressure to comment on the clips as he is in camp with the SA team. We discuss the fact that Rassie has threatened to leak footage on social media. I ask Jaco for his advice and he suggests that I should try and get ahead of it and respond to Rassie’s clips.”
In contrast, Peyper claimed: “Mr Berry did not indicate to me that Rassie threatened to leak footage on social media. He only asked for my advice
whether he should provide answers to the video clips received from the Springbok management team and I recommended that from experience he should do so, as that often defuses the media reporting the next day as teams now engage with the referee and not the mainstream rugby media.
“My view, as expressed to Mr Berry during the telephonic conversation, was that it would be preferable for him to engage with the Springbok management team rather than to ignore the request as in my experience, providing a response has had the effect of diffusing tensions between coaches and referees. This, in turn, leads to fewer comments in the media about refereeing decisions from previous matches and an increased focus on preparations for upcoming matches.”