Taunting the tigerUm excuse me: I suppose it's news that the guys who were mauled by Tatiana the tiger were standing on a rail and yelling at her, but that's not exactly an excuse for what happened. The animals at the zoo aren't supposed to get out. Period.
It's terrible that people taunt the animals, but they do, and they have, and they will -- and if the zoo pens and cages can't hold the animals anyway, there's a real problem.
BTW, it was highly unlikely that "taunting" got the tiger agitated. More likely she thought they were food. That's a much more common predator response.
digg •
del.icio.us •
sphere •
google
•
Comments (4)
Yes indeed, that is 100% correct. And once the tiger tasted human flesh and blood in December of 2006, the die was essentially cast. Ask yourself, how likely is it that the tiger first learned how to jump up the the grotto's ledge on December 25, 2007? Or, was this a move learned earlier? One of the Dhaliwals claimed the tiger attacked from out of the large bush / small tree in the center area of the viewing platform. That is downright interesting. I would be dollars to donuts that the tiger had jumped up before, and hid there before. Only this time around, there were 3 out of a very widespread scattering of 25 patrons, who happened to be standing there, and happened to be trying to get the tigers in the grotto to look up. So, this time, the tiger knew, if it jumped up there, it would soon have its favorite delicacy soon thereafter. If not for these three young toughs, the inevitable victims might later have been a family or a group of school kids, at some later date. Arrest Mollinedo!
Posted by ArrestMollenedo | January 18, 2008 06:21 PM
Human Blood.. give me a break! So the saying goes from one generation of idiots to another.
Tatiana died 25 Dec-2007, at the hands of the San Francisco Police Department, when she escaped from her enclosure. (Tatiana was provoked!!) She was only acting in her defense against three punks that night. Alcohol and marijuana was found in the boys blood system after the attack. Also a bloody sign was found inside Tatiana's enclosure. Why didn't Tatiana try to get out of her enclosure before? Because, there was no need for her to protect herself! I really feel that, Tatiana is the true victim here. The truth is now coming clear for all of us to see. It’s sad that an alcohol/marijuana influence person died and others were injured that night. Since, the tiger was provoked and abused by their hands, well.... "they got what they deserved!". I'm only sorry that Tatiana didn't get a chance to finish her work that December night, before she was killed. I agree, that Tatiana should not have been able to escaped from her enclosure at the zoo, but how high does a wall have to be? When will the animals ever have a voice? We expect wild animals to live by our rules, in a cage knowing this can never be. The deep desire to be free is in all of us. Even if she was caught and put back into her enclosure, I think there might have been a cry to put her down anyway. Even for a brief moment if she felt free, makes me feel happy inside. For the last minutes of her life she knew, what it felt to have freedom.
Posted by Jeff | January 19, 2008 02:18 AM
Indeed, there is culpability on both sides here.
The zoo manifestly failed in its duty to protect the tiger. If the tiger gets out then the tiger will likely be killed after all. The tiger is not at fault and neither are the cops for the shooting. The zoo was negligent in allowing the tiger a means to escape, the thing speaks for itself.
But the kids illegally taunted the tiger, this is at least negligence per se.
So the zoo owes for the kids for their medical bills and funeral expenses and the loss of likely future earnings by the one killed. But the kids owe the zoo for a new tiger and the lost revenue while the zoo was closed for a week. These sums of money need to be offset against each other. Neither side is vindicated.
Posted by Holly | January 19, 2008 11:37 AM
Zoo CEO Mollinedo and Zoological Society Board Chair Podell need to be made to don the orange jump suits and do the perp walk for criminal negligence for maintaining a tiger which had tasted human blood in substandard enclosure.
Podell, a Republican, indicated at the hearing that he only cared about raising money for the Zoo. That is a stark indication that he abdicated his fiduciary responsibility as Board Chair to ensure that his organization did not put people in harms way.
Come on, District Attorney Harris, let's see an indictment of these swells for criminal negligence which led to the death of a young man.
-marc
Posted by marcos![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/politics/nav-commenters.gif)
|
January 24, 2008 07:41 AM