Other Talk "Otterville"

Tiger escape

Old 01-01-08, 08:25 PM
  #251  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Matt925's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by McHawkson
I agreed with that one. I asked myself, "Why did tiger decided to jump on particular day and that particular 3 guys? Why not any other day where tiger can easily capture little kid? Did tiger practiced jumping before that particular day?” and many other dozen questions. I only can answer “it must be those 2 guys that provoked tiger to jump 12 ft wall and chased them down.”
I agree that if these guys were shooting the tiger with slingshots they are complete douchebags and the way things turned out is almost like poetic justice, but I'm still very uncomfortable that a tiger could just jump out of the habitat. If and when I have kids I won't be taking them there. I'm sure there will be lawsuits all over the place and it is a complicated issue. If it's all true these guys are complete douchebags though, no doubt about it.
Old 01-01-08, 08:57 PM
  #252  
DVD Talk Legend
 
chrisih8u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: A few miles north of the Cape
Posts: 18,335
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
If they had slingshots that goes way beyond taunting. That puts the animal's life in jeopardy. Is it a felony to attack an endangered species? And doesnt the law say that if someone dies in the commission of a felony then its murder?

Kinda strange that the NY Post is the only one with the story, though.
Old 01-01-08, 09:08 PM
  #253  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
You will NEVER be able to construct anything that is HUMAN-FREE from tampering. There will always be some idiot who does something which gets him killed, which preventative measures never took into account.
I agree. But the "something which gets him killed" should be something more "active" than (presumably) slingshot volleys. Intentionally opening a door or giving the tiger a ladder or breaking into the enclosure...you can't prevent a bonehead human stunt like that. But you can surely anticipate that someday (for whatever reason) a tiger might really, really, really want out of the enclosure. From day one, all the "experts" were on TV talking of specifications and recommendations about moat widths and wall heights and such, which means it is a topic which smart experienced people have taken into account and thought about and reached conclusions on.

Let's just use some common sense here. These kids were idiots, and they got an endangered species killed. They are responsible entirely, regardless of how high a fence was, how long it took medics to respond, or how long it took police to show up. They started the event, and it's much more than just a "They started it!" debate. They are responsible for the death of their friend and a beautiful animal. No one else.
Common sense says a sufficiently high wall would have contained the tiger, even an extremely pissed off tiger.

You're making an argument for protecting human behavior from itself and preventing responsibility from taking its natural course.
I'm all for the responsibility thing. I guess the definition of "natural course" depends on who is deemed responsible.

As proof even the 12ft height was just fine, we have no history of attacks at this zoo relating to height of a wall.
That proves the 12ft height was never put to a real-world test.

Even officials who came to inspect the height...did nothing about recommending it be higher. So, if you're going to blame anybody, it's the actual organization who is charge of inspecting the zoos for that state.
I'm sure the finger pointing is happening already. Big Time.
Old 01-01-08, 09:20 PM
  #254  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Matt925's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by chrisih8u
If they had slingshots that goes way beyond taunting. That puts the animal's life in jeopardy. Is it a felony to attack an endangered species? And doesnt the law say that if someone dies in the commission of a felony then its murder?

Kinda strange that the NY Post is the only one with the story, though.
That's interesting. I assumed by seeing the ktvu (local tv station) and latimes links, they legitimately backed up the story, but I didn't bother clicking the links. Only the ktvu story mentions the slingshots, with which they cite "a published report" (the new york post?!?).

But maybe it is true. We'll see.
Old 01-01-08, 09:51 PM
  #255  
DVD Talk Legend
 
JumpCutz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: south of heaven
Posts: 13,540
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I posted the link to the KTVU story thinking the same, but it is odd that no one but the NY Post is actually running with this.
I live in San Jose and was alerted to the slingshot story while listening to KGO radio's John Rothmann who did an hour on this subject and cited the Post story as if it were widely reported.
Hmm.
Old 01-01-08, 10:00 PM
  #256  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Matt925's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JumpCutz
I posted the link to the KTVU story thinking the same, but it is odd that no one but the NY Post is actually running with this.
I live in San Jose and was alerted to the slingshot story while listening to KGO radio's John Rothmann who did an hour on this subject and cited the Post story as if it were widely reported.
Hmm.
The new york post is one step up from the weekly world news. I don't listen to talk am either. Not saying the story isn't true, but I'd like to see other sources before I catch emotions over this whole story.
Old 01-01-08, 10:36 PM
  #257  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 53,614
Received 132 Likes on 96 Posts
Originally Posted by jonnyquest
That proves the 12ft height was never put to a real-world test.
Really. How long has the zoo been opend to the real-world public. How many times have tigers leaped across the moat, scaling the 12ft wall, and attacked people.

Yeah, that's what I thought.

Oh wait. Let's construct a 20ft wall. Then, let's wait till a few more idiots come along, who decided to do something else, and then let's blame zoo yet again for another non-real world construction.
Old 01-01-08, 11:30 PM
  #258  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
Really. How long has the zoo been opend to the real-world public. How many times have tigers leaped across the moat, scaling the 12ft wall, and attacked people.
One time, as far as I know. That's the point. Successful escape on the first attempt. Which proves 12ft is not high enough. If the tiger had leaped the moat and then tried and tried and tried to get over the 12ft wall, eventually passing out from exhaustion or giving up in frustration...that would count as proof that 12ft is high enough. And if the same scenario happened multiple times, with multiple tigers, that would count as further proof. However, if no previous escape has ever been attempted, doesn't prove anything about the adequacy of the wall, no matter how long it has been there.
Old 01-02-08, 12:56 AM
  #259  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Formerly known as "brizz"/kck
Posts: 23,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i hope those douchebags spend some time in federal pound them in the ass prison. assholes.
Old 01-02-08, 01:35 AM
  #260  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 53,614
Received 132 Likes on 96 Posts
Originally Posted by jonnyquest
One time, as far as I know. That's the point. Successful escape on the first attempt. Which proves 12ft is not high enough...
The first case was of a zookeeper who fed a tiger THROUGH the bars and got too close during a public feeding. A tiger did not escape.

If this is NOT the case you're referring to, please let me know. Otherwise, I'm going to assume you're wrong.
Old 01-02-08, 02:10 AM
  #261  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Signal Hill, CA
Posts: 3,471
Received 60 Likes on 41 Posts
Sounds like some people want to hold the zoo responsible no matter how much of an idiotic thing some moron decides to do.

If the same moron decided to stick his hand down his running garbage disposal should he be able to sue the company that made the garbage disposal because:

A) he failed to read in the instructions that sticking your hand down the disposal would result in a serious injury and the garbage disposal company should have foreseen this moron's lack of reading skills or laziness in reading and sent one of their representatives over to the moron's house to read the instructions to him.

B) the garbage disposal company did not invent a garbage disposal that automatically shuts off when human flesh is inserted in it but allows all other materials to be ground up.

C) the garbage disposal company did not require that people pass a safety test and acquire a license before operating their dangerous garbage disposal.
Old 01-02-08, 02:34 AM
  #262  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 53,614
Received 132 Likes on 96 Posts
Good post.
Old 01-02-08, 10:00 AM
  #263  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Malvern, PA
Posts: 5,010
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
The first case was of a zookeeper who fed a tiger THROUGH the bars and got too close during a public feeding. A tiger did not escape.

If this is NOT the case you're referring to, please let me know. Otherwise, I'm going to assume you're wrong.
He's not referring to that. He's refering to the current incident/escape as the "one time." In other words, the tiger is 1 for 1 in escape attempts.
Old 01-02-08, 11:31 AM
  #264  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 22,063
Received 116 Likes on 86 Posts
Like I said yesterday this will come down to "contributory negligence" on behalf of the boys. Honda can make the safest car they possibly can but if you drive into a tree at 100mph you are likely still going to die and there are those that can say that Honda should make a car that you won't die in "no matter what" but the fact remains that while you may find a specification or two that would have made the crash more survivable the driver is still the one with the highest degree of negligence. So these boys can sue for $1m each but if they are found to be 80% responsible the reward money could be seriously diminished - probably to the point where it would cost much more to go to court than any kind of monetary reward.
Old 01-02-08, 04:29 PM
  #265  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Goldblum
He's not referring to that. He's refering to the current incident/escape as the "one time." In other words, the tiger is 1 for 1 in escape attempts.
Right. That's what I'm saying.
Old 01-02-08, 04:43 PM
  #266  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 22,063
Received 116 Likes on 86 Posts
I'm not seeing what the problem is here..

Old 01-02-08, 05:05 PM
  #267  
Senior Member
 
kbmagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Just this side of paradise...
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by McHawkson
I agreed with that one. I asked myself, "Why did tiger decided to jump on particular day and that particular 3 guys? Why not any other day where tiger can easily capture little kid? Did tiger practiced jumping before that particular day?” and many other dozen questions. I only can answer “it must be those 2 guys that provoked tiger to jump 12 ft wall and chased them down.”
I used to work at an exotic animal compound. They had many 'big cats' including tigers, lions, leopards and cougars. NOTHING grabbed the attention of the cats like a little child running past their enclosures. It was like clicking on a switch in their brains that alerted them to "Food approaching!" We didn't get children in the area on a daily basis (usually only during fund-raising events) but it was interesting to observe how these cats went from what appeared to be docile boredom to alert and active 'hunter' in the matter of seconds...I have zero doubt that if a child got close to the cats...they'd be cat-food.

I'm sure at the zoo, there are hundreds of little children running around on a daily basis..and I'm sure that the cat's instincts to leap out were triggered MANY times...it just didn't act upon them because the wall appeared to be too high, and the motivation wasn't high enough (it was well fed).

It took something extreme to cause that cat to leap out of the enclosure. News of the slingshots didn't surprise me at all...I bet the cat initially approached the wall and leaped at the boys in an attempt to intimidate them enough that they'd leave...and it was upon that attempt that the cat discovered that perhaps it *could* make the leap...and it did.

It's a damn shame that an endangered creature like this had to be destroyed. I don't believe the officers on the scene had any choice. The blame is squarely aimed at the boys who tormented the cat. I'm angry because I don't believe they will be held accountable, and will likely experience financial gain from their actions.

If nothing else, zoos should learn from this experience that they need to have security and/or security cameras aimed at each enclosure that houses animals in a way that the public can get close enough to throw something at them or reach toward them. Both for the protection of visitors and the protection of the animals.

If this zoo had security cameras, we wouldn't be speculating..we'd know what happened, and we'd know what needed to be done to keep it from happening again. (Higher wall, plexiglass to keep idiots from hurting the animals, etc.)

I'm sure if these boys were 'innocent victims' of a big cat that simply figured out how to get out of its enclosure, they would have been very quick to agree to interviews and would be very quick to tell their tale of "We were just hanging out at the zoo, and it came running at us!!" to anyone who would listen... and perhaps even try to sell their story to an entertainment outlet of some sort (the Enquirer, Lifetime Television, etc.). The fact that they'll only communicate with the world via their attorney speaks volumes to me.

This story makes me angry for so many reasons...and the true victim of the entire thing is already dead, so we can't reverse the damage.
Old 01-03-08, 03:15 AM
  #268  
DVD Talk Legend
 
chrisih8u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: A few miles north of the Cape
Posts: 18,335
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
There were no slingshots found on the victims.


Police today flatly denied a report that the three victims of the Christmas Day tiger mauling at the San Francisco Zoo were carrying slingshots on the day of the attack, which claimed the life of a 17-year-old zoo visitor.

The denial follows a report that appeared in the New York Post and cited an unnamed police source who made the slingshot claim about Carlos Sousa Jr. and brothers Paul and Kulbir Dhaliwal. Sousa was killed in the attack.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=4072527&page=1
Old 01-03-08, 05:32 AM
  #269  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 918
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Someone started a memorial myspace page for the tiger. www.myspace.com/rip_tatiana
Old 01-03-08, 07:19 AM
  #270  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: MI
Posts: 25,074
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by chrisih8u
There were no slingshots found on the victims.


Police today flatly denied a report that the three victims of the Christmas Day tiger mauling at the San Francisco Zoo were carrying slingshots on the day of the attack, which claimed the life of a 17-year-old zoo visitor.

The denial follows a report that appeared in the New York Post and cited an unnamed police source who made the slingshot claim about Carlos Sousa Jr. and brothers Paul and Kulbir Dhaliwal. Sousa was killed in the attack.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=4072527&page=1
You're letting facts intrude on several peoples' rants.
Old 01-03-08, 08:40 AM
  #271  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 22,063
Received 116 Likes on 86 Posts
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl.../MN9TU8AGC.DTL

S.F. Zoo visitor saw 2 victims of tiger attack teasing lions

(01-02) 22:15 PST San Francisco -- Two victims of a lethal Christmas Day tiger attack were harassing the big cats at the San Francisco Zoo shortly before a 350-pound feline escaped its enclosure and mauled them, a woman told The Chronicle on Wednesday.

The revelation comes as the zoo reopens Wednesday, nine days after a visitor was killed and two of his friends were injured by the Siberian tiger, later shot dead by police.

Jennifer Miller, who was at the zoo with her husband and two children that ill-fated Christmas afternoon, said she saw four young men at the big-cat grottos - and three of them were teasing the lions a short time before the tiger's bloody rampage that killed 17-year-old Carlos Sousa Jr.

"The boys, especially the older one, were roaring at them. He was taunting them," the San Francisco woman said. "They were trying to get that lion's attention. ... The lion was bristling, so I just said, 'Come on, let's get out of here' because my kids were disturbed by it."

She said Sousa - whom she later recognized from his photo in the newspaper - was not heckling. The Chronicle contacted Miller after learning that she and her family had seen the young men at the zoo Christmas Day.

Miller, who said she visits the zoo with her relatives every Christmas, said the young men stood out because she has seen mostly families there. Although authorities have said Sousa was accompanied only by San Jose brothers Paul Dhaliwal, 19, and Kulbir Dhaliwal, 23, Miller said four young men were together when she came across them.

Mark Geragos, an attorney speaking on behalf of the Dhaliwals, angrily denied that his clients teased the animals. He also accused the zoo administration and their newly hired crisis spokesman of "peddling unfounded rumors."

"It's unconscionable," he said. "They're doing nothing but a calculated attack on these victims ... when in actuality the zoo security didn't do what they should have been doing after the attack."

Geragos maintains that the brothers ran to the Terrace Cafe after Tatiana escaped and tried for more than 30 minutes to solicit help from zoo employees. He dismissed reports of the victims throwing rocks at the tiger as "just not true."

Miller called the behavior she witnessed by the victims "disturbing."

Her family was looking at the lions when the young men stopped beside them at the big-cat grottos - five outdoor exhibits attached to the Lion House. The young men started roaring at the lions and acting "boisterous" to get their attention, said Miller, who added that she watched the four for five minutes or so a little after 4 p.m.

"It was why we left," she said. "Their behavior was disturbing. They kept doing it."

Sousa refrained from such tactics, Miller said.

"He wasn't roaring. He wasn't taunting them," she recalled. "He kept looking at me apologetically like, 'I'm sorry, I know we are being stupid.' "

When a friend told Miller about the attacks - first reported to 911 dispatchers at 5:07 p.m. - she called police the day after Christmas to tell them what she had seen. She called back Wednesday because she was wondering why news accounts mentioned only three young men.

San Francisco police Inspector Valerie Matthews said investigators had talked to Miller on Wednesday but haven't been able to substantiate yet her account of a fourth person with the victims at the zoo. Authorities have been unable to corroborate reports that the victims taunted the tigers, she said.

"I don't know if what they did was any more than what kindergartners do at the zoo every day," Matthews said.

She said taunting an animal at the zoo is a misdemeanor.

Zoo officials declined Wednesday to specifically say that they suspected taunting in the escape of the tiger.

"Something prompted our tiger to leap over the exhibit," said Manuel Mollinedo, executive director of the zoo, in response to questions during a 13-minute press conference attended by at least 40 media representatives on Wednesday.

Mollinedo said new "Protect the Animals" signs would ask patrons to leave the animals alone, and portable loudspeakers would remind visitors to leave promptly at the 5 p.m. closing time. A hard-wired notification system is also in the offing to alert visitors to any escapes by the creatures that live there.

"Help make the zoo a safe environment," the signs state. "The magnificent animals in the zoo are wild and possess all their natural instincts. You are a guest in their home. Please remember they are sensitive and have feelings. PLEASE don't tap on glass, throw anything into exhibits, make excessive noise, tease or call out to them."

At the news conference, Zoological Society Chairman Nick Podell lavishly praised the beleaguered Mollinedo, who took over at the zoo in February 2004 and was earning $314,038 a year plus $15,702 in benefits and a $9,548 expense account, according to zoo tax documents filed in November. The society operates the zoo, although the land and animals are owned by the city.

Zoo officials said that over the next 30 days they will build a reinforced-glass barrier atop the tiger grotto's dry moat wall. On Tuesday the zoo said the glass wall would be 4 to 5 feet high, bringing the wall height to at least 16.5 feet tall, roughly what is suggested by national standards. However, on Wednesday the zoo said the wall would be at least 19 feet tall and feature viewing holes.

In the days after the fatal mauling, zoo officials gave five different estimates of the moat wall's height before finally conceding the wall was only 12.5 feet tall - 4 feet shorter than national recommendations.

"It will put us in the top end of the spectrum for containment facilities," Mollinedo said.

He remained vague on several other issues. Although he said 20 patrons were at the zoo when the attack occurred, he didn't know how many staff people or security officers were present. He said there will be more employees on duty in the future, although he wasn't sure when that staffing increase would happen. And he didn't know how much the proposed improvements would cost or where the money would come from.

"I'll have to get back to you on that," Mollinedo said more than once.

Mollinedo said his staff acted heroically after the attacks, although he couldn't describe any specific instances. However, zoo employees have told The Chronicle that they were among the first on the scene and led paramedics to Sousa's body while the tiger was still roaming the grounds.

When the zoo reopens, the big cats will be inside the Lion House, which will be closed to the public. Screened fences and barriers will surround the outdoor grotto and Terrace Cafe, sites of the attacks.

Patrons will be able to leave mementos and tributes at the main entrance to both Sousa and the 4-year-old Tatiana, who had mangled her keeper's arm a year earlier.

Also Wednesday, San Francisco police Sgt. Steve Mannina said investigators found an empty vodka bottle in the car that was used by the victims to go to the zoo on Christmas Day. Inspectors haven't concluded the significance of the find, he added.

Mannina also said results of toxicological tests performed on Sousa, who was killed by the tiger, have not been returned yet.
At least there is a witness now.
Old 01-03-08, 09:28 AM
  #272  
DVD Talk Legend
 
McHawkson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: America Empire
Posts: 14,752
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
[sigh]

This whole thing is completely fucked up.
Old 01-03-08, 11:01 AM
  #273  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Malvern, PA
Posts: 5,010
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
She said Sousa - whom she later recognized from his photo in the newspaper - was not heckling.

Sousa refrained from such tactics, Miller said.

"He wasn't roaring. He wasn't taunting them," she recalled. "He kept looking at me apologetically like, 'I'm sorry, I know we are being stupid.'
So he was an innocent victim after all.

Last edited by Goldblum; 01-03-08 at 11:03 AM.
Old 01-03-08, 11:01 AM
  #274  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
DaveNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Sacramento (The City of a Beer)
Posts: 7,110
Received 15 Likes on 11 Posts
so the kids got the tiger drunk on vodka and the tiger completely ate the 4th kid that was witnessed there.
Old 01-03-08, 11:54 AM
  #275  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Signal Hill, CA
Posts: 3,471
Received 60 Likes on 41 Posts
If the brothers did, indeed, not have slingshots, I wonder why "The New York Post" reported that they did. I've never read "The Post," but is it known to make such glaring mistakes?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.