In a heart-wrenching revelation, former Formula 1 driver Ralf Schumacher accused a German energy company, RWE, of causing the death of his pregnant deer during New Year’s Eve celebrations. This accusation has led to a public dispute with RWE, who vehemently denies any involvement in the incident.
- Schumacher’s Blame Game: Ralf Schumacher holds RWE’s employees responsible for the death of his pregnant deer, asserting they ignited “extremely strong firecrackers” on his property, which lies in isolation, five kilometres away from any vicinity.
- RWE’s Rebuttal: In response to Schumacher’s allegations, RWE issued a statement denying any involvement. They maintained that their employees were not near Schumacher’s property during the incident and highlighted their policy against the use of fireworks.
- Schumacher’s Persistent Assertions: Despite RWE’s denial, Schumacher continued to accuse the company, based on his staff’s sightings of RWE’s security personnel discharging fireworks before 9 pm. He emphasized the need for RWE to prevent such occurrences in the future and expressed his grief over the tragic loss of his pregnant deer.
In a tragic turn of events, Ralf Schumacher, a name synonymous with Formula 1 racing, faced a personal loss when his pregnant deer died following New Year’s Eve celebrations. Schumacher, taking to Instagram, blamed the employees of RWE for the demise of his deer, alleging that they set off powerful firecrackers on his isolated farm. His post was a poignant mix of grief and indignation, where he said:
“I wish the workers of RWE global factory protection and the company a happy new year. Thanks to her employee, who lit some extremely strong firecrackers right in my yard, which is five km away from everything, unfortunately the animal died. Not to mention the panic of the horses, ponies, pigs and the many other poor animals. You can be proud of yourselves.”
RWE, however, countered these allegations. A spokesperson for the company spoke to Bild, highlighting their adherence to internal regulations and denying any wrongdoing:
“We have read Mr. Schumacher’s post and take the allegations made in it very seriously. We also regret that the animal died. In principle, it would be a massive violation of our regulations to set off fireworks during an operation; Of course, that also applies to New Year’s Eve. According to our findings, neither RWE employees nor employees of partner companies were at the alleged location between 9pm and 4am. In addition, to our knowledge, firecrackers were not set off by RWE or partner employees anywhere else. Early in the evening, young people with cars and firecrackers were found near the alleged location and were told that entering the RWE premises was not permitted. Unfortunately, we can no longer clarify whether there is a connection here.”
Schumacher, however, remained resolute in his stance. He insisted that his employees witnessed security personnel from the factory setting off fireworks before the 9pm curfew, dangerously close to the animals. Schumacher’s pain is palpable as he laments the loss of his deer:
“My employees observed that members of the factory security set off fireworks before closing time at 9pm. This is incomprehensible to me as it is obvious that there are animals just 20 meters away. Every student knows that you should not handle fireworks near a farm. It is important to me that RWE ensures that an event like this never takes place on my doorstep again. That’s why I’m relieved that RWE has agreed to take this incident seriously. There are so many other places there where you wouldn’t put animals in danger. For my part, I deeply mourn the loss of one of my wild animals who was pregnant at the time of his death. It’s just tragic.”
This controversy between Ralf Schumacher and RWE underscores the delicate balance between corporate activities and the safety of wildlife, especially in rural areas. It also highlights the emotional toll such incidents can take on individuals who care deeply for their animals. The debate continues, with both sides standing firmly on their assertions.