When Tiger(s) Attack

[ARD]

IIR the story correctly, there are no surveillance cameras at that zoo.

Also, LA Times has people refuting the earlier reports:

(Zoo Director Manuel Mollinedo) also denied published reports that quoted him saying that one of the victims had danged their arm or leg over the sheer wall, perhaps allowing the tiger to pounce and use it to climb out of the grotto.

Police Chief Heather Fong said published reports that a shoe was found inside the tiger grotto also were incorrect.

"The tiger must have escaped from the front part of the exhibit," Mollinedo said.

 

[outofplace]

http://www.optimum.net/News/AP/Article?articleId=367367

For those who want to blame the victims, the director of the zoo is now admitting that the wall around the enclosure was lower than the recommended height and the tiger did jump out.

I really hope they are sued out of business by the survivors and the family of the kid who was killed.

 

[beefncheddar]

http://www.optimum.net/News/AP/Article?articleId=367367

For those who want to blame the victims, the director of the zoo is now admitting that the wall around the enclosure was lower than the recommended height and the tiger did jump out.

I really hope they are sued out of business by the survivors and the family of the kid who was killed.

And, yet, had kid not been forking around where he shouldn't have, there never would have been a problem.

 

[outofplace]

http://www.optimum.net/News/AP/Article?articleId=367367

For those who want to blame the victims, the director of the zoo is now admitting that the wall around the enclosure was lower than the recommended height and the tiger did jump out.

I really hope they are sued out of business by the survivors and the family of the kid who was killed.

And, yet, had kid not been forking around where he shouldn't have, there never would have been a problem.

We don't even know that the kid did anything. That's one of the things that bothers me on this thread. We have conflicting reports, including denials from investigators regarding some of the speculation that led to people blaming the kid in the first place, yet a lot of people are ready to blame the kid who got killed. I don't even understand why.

 

[Armchair_QB]

http://www.optimum.net/News/AP/Article?articleId=367367

For those who want to blame the victims, the director of the zoo is now admitting that the wall around the enclosure was lower than the recommended height and the tiger did jump out.

I really hope they are sued out of business by the survivors and the family of the kid who was killed.

And, yet, had kid not been forking around where he shouldn't have, there never would have been a problem.

We don't even know that the kid did anything. That's one of the things that bothers me on this thread. We have conflicting reports, including denials from investigators regarding some of the speculation that led to people blaming the kid in the first place, yet a lot of people are ready to blame the kid who got killed. I don't even understand why.

Odd that the other two kids are refusing to cooperate with authorities. You'd think they'd want to get the truth out there to stop the speculation.

Unless, of course, they had something to do with the tiger getting out.

 

[outofplace]

http://www.optimum.net/News/AP/Article?articleId=367367

For those who want to blame the victims, the director of the zoo is now admitting that the wall around the enclosure was lower than the recommended height and the tiger did jump out.

I really hope they are sued out of business by the survivors and the family of the kid who was killed.

Lots of assumptions. What we know is that a tiger that had wounded a human being previously was on display in an enclosure that the zoo director admits had a wall below the recommended height. That same director is also saying it does look like the tiger jumped and climbed to get out and Jack Hanna is now backing off his claim that it would have been impossible for the tiger to do so.

One person is dead. Two more were badly injured and it is pure dumb luck that it wasn't worse.

And I don't care if all three victims were making faces, shouting or throwing things at the tiger. They didn't deserve what happened and the zoo obviously didn't have the proper safeguards in place.

And, yet, had kid not been forking around where he shouldn't have, there never would have been a problem.

We don't even know that the kid did anything. That's one of the things that bothers me on this thread. We have conflicting reports, including denials from investigators regarding some of the speculation that led to people blaming the kid in the first place, yet a lot of people are ready to blame the kid who got killed. I don't even understand why.

Odd that the other two kids are refusing to cooperate with authorities. You'd think they'd want to get the truth out there to stop the speculation.

Unless, of course, they had something to do with the tiger getting out.

 

[Write-brained]

Imagine being one of the two who were injured but not killed? Now THAT's a helluva story to tell people. If you can't get laid after telling your story of survival after getting mauled by an 800-pound tiger, well, you've problems.

Mike311gd has no idea why he has a sudden urge to visit the zoo...

Don't you think for a forking second that didn't cross my mind when I read that post, my friend. Having a right arm is overrated, anyway.

But can you do the shocker with your left hand?

 

[beefncheddar]

We don't even know that the kid did anything. That's one of the things that bothers me on this thread. We have conflicting reports, including denials from investigators regarding some of the speculation that led to people blaming the kid in the first place, yet a lot of people are ready to blame the kid who got killed. I don't even understand why.

Because tigers in zoos don't generally hurdle 33-foot moats and 12-foot walls without provocation?

Because every animal expert I've read has said the leap was impossible (though, admittedly, they may not have known the exact height of the wall).

Because police are analyzing a footprint atop the wall.

Because the tiger *allegedly* never even went near the moat, being content to hang out at a different part of the exhibit.

Gee, why would anyone think the kid could possibly be at fault?

 

[beefncheddar]

From the Chronicle:

Either Amritpal "Paul" Dhaliwal, 19, or his 23-year-old brother Kulbir Dhaliwal answered the phone and told Sousa Sr. that his son wasn't with them. In reality, the three young men were either on their way to or had already arrived at the San Francisco Zoo, where they would later be mauled by a 350-pound Siberian tiger.

"I said, 'Have you seen my son?' and he said, 'No,' then he wished me a merry Christmas," the father said.

The Dhaliwal brothers have been hostile to police in the current death investigation and were "extremely belligerent" in an earlier encounter with police this year, authorities say.

After the zoo attack, authorities said, the brothers had refused to give their own names, identify the victim or initially give authorities an account of what occurred.

My new hypothesis: They fed his ass to the tiger.

 

[outofplace]

We don't even know that the kid did anything. That's one of the things that bothers me on this thread. We have conflicting reports, including denials from investigators regarding some of the speculation that led to people blaming the kid in the first place, yet a lot of people are ready to blame the kid who got killed. I don't even understand why.

Because tigers in zoos don't generally hurdle 33-foot moats and 12-foot walls without provocation?

Because every animal expert I've read has said the leap was impossible (though, admittedly, they may not have known the exact height of the wall).

Because police are analyzing a footprint atop the wall.

Because the tiger *allegedly* never even went near the moat, being content to hang out at a different part of the exhibit.

Gee, why would anyone think the kid could possibly be at fault?

Did you even read the last article linked above? Even the zoo's director is saying that it is looking like the tiger did get out on its own. And the loudest "expert" was Hanna, and he is backtracking now. I also read one yesterday that the part about the investigators denying the report about the footprint.

Edit: mustard's posts make me wonder what the heck happened. But that is actual information, not the speculation that has been driving much of this discussion.

If the enclosure wasn't up to specs, the zoo is at least partially at fault. Period.

 

[beefncheddar]

Actually, I just looked at a graphic on sfgate and it looks like the zoo's forked.
And I *still* think the kids caused it.

 

[beefncheddar]