Trek-Segafredo have "mutually agreed to part ways" with Italian pro Antonio Tiberi, who was in February fined €4,000 for shooting and killing a cat belonging to Federico Pedini Amati, the former head of state and current Minister of Tourism for San Marino.
In a statement released this afternoon, the WorldTour outfit said Tiberi's contract was now terminated, saying his actions during suspension "did not meet our criteria for a return to competition".
Trek-Segafredo and Antonio Tiberi have mutually agreed to part ways, effective immediately, after the rider's actions during his suspension did not meet our criteria for a return to competition. With the rider's contract now terminated, he is free to sign with another team.
Earlier in the year the story broke that the promising 21-year-old rider, who won the junior TT event at the World Championships in Harrogate in 2019, had appeared in court and been fined for shooting and killing the pet of a political figure in San Marino.
The pet had been adopted by Pedini Amati, the politician who served as Captain Regent, one of the landlocked country's joint heads of state that are elected every six months, between 1 April 2008 and October 2008 and is now a minister.
"Reprehensible"
At the time, Trek-Segafredo called Tiberi's actions "reprehensible" and announced he would be suspended without pay for a minimum of 20 days, the suspended salary donated to an animal protection organisation.
According to the court report, Tiberi "positioned himself with an air rifle – a Hatsan BT65 SB Elite model – at the window of the apartment where he lives in San Marino" before firing "shots in the direction of Via Istriani, deliberately hitting the skull of a moving cat". He was fined €4,000 in court and had the air rifle confiscated.
After the shooting, on June 21 last year, Pedini Amati, 46, found his injured pet and called the police who rushed to the scene. An investigation showed the animal had died instantly, leaving the Minister of Tourism in San Marino disappointed with what he saw as too lenient a sentence.
"The cat did not disturb anyone," he said. "He has been with us for a long time. My daughter Lucia, three years old, loved it. You can't kill a pet and get away with a €4,000 fine."
Tiberi apologised, calling his actions "tremendously stupid and irresponsible", insisting it "was not my intention to kill the cat; it was an accident" while he was trying to "test the gun's firing capabilities".
"For example, I was aiming for a traffic sign," he said. "And I admit that I – stupidly and unconsciously – tried to catch a cat… To my surprise I really hit it… I had no intention of killing the animal. In fact, I was convinced that the weapon was not lethal," he claimed.
Add new comment
12 comments
I am sorry but my poor logic is unable to undestand why shooting a cat is a 4000 fine and when ordering a grilled chicken it is Thursday at KFC.
Do you genuinely not understand the distinction between killing an animal one owns oneself for food (or in the case of KFC to make food to sell to other people) and killing an animal that belongs to someone else just for the sadistic pleasure of killing something? Personally I wouldn't do either but I find the difference fairly easy to comprehend.
Does an obese guy that his life is threatened by cholesterol, really needs his third burger in a day, or is it sadistic pleasure of ordering something to have get killed for his own pleasure?
If I want to raise the stakes, do we really need exploit killed animals meat for cat food? https://www.peta.org/about-peta/faq/is-it-safe-to-feed-my-dog-or-cat-a-v...
At least he's been taught a valuable lesson.
If you want to kill living things with no consequences, buy a car.
”To my surprise I really hit it… I had no intention of killing the animal. In fact, I was convinced that the weapon was not lethal,"
I assume there is no test you need to pass before buying an air rifle?
While I think that his actions deserve punishment, I don't think a stupid mistake should be the end of his career. I think Trek went too far by terminating his contract.
Note that Trek said, "the rider's actions during his suspension did not meet our criteria for a return to competition", which implies that there is more to the ending of the contract than just the initial incident, presumably he's failed to train as instructed while suspended or not undertaken some rehabilitation measures they asked him to complete. If they were going to sack him for the initial incident they could, and presumably would, have done so straight away and thereby avoided the bad publicity the incident has brought to the team.
Sick bastard. They ought to pump a couple of those pellets in his a**e.
Good. Would have been nice if West Ham had taken a similar principled stand.
I think you will find that cat is very much alive, thankfully.
Well indeed and rehomed with a new owner, I believe, but both cases involving gross cruelty to animals deserving of severe sanction.
When said West Ham player left the field injured on Saturday, he was waved off with a rendition of "That's how your cat felt" by the Palace fans.