Police: Zoo survivor told of standing on railing and yelling at tiger

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

One of the two survivors of the San Francisco Zoo tiger attack that left a 17-year-old fatally mauled told the victim's father that the three had yelled and waved at the animal while standing atop the railing of the tiger's enclosure, police said in court documents filed Thursday.

(snip)

The search warrant affidavit was prepared Tuesday by police Inspector Valerie Matthews, the lead investigator in the case, and was filed with the court late Thursday. It cites multiple reports of a group of young men taunting animals at the zoo as basis for a court to grant police the right to search the cell phones and BMW, where police said they had seen the partially full bottle vodka bottle in the front passenger seat.

Both Dhaliwal brothers were hospitalized after the maulings with head wounds. Matthews said in the warrant application that Paul Dhaliwal's blood alcohol level had been measured after the attack at 0.16 percent, twice the legal level for drunkenness. She did not indicate exactly when the test had been conducted.

(snip)

Matthews said police had found a partial shoe print on top of the railing and concluded that it matched a shoe worn by Paul Dhaliwal.

(snip)

"As a result of this investigation, (police believe) that the tiger may have been taunted/agitated by its eventual victims," Matthews wrote in the affidavit. Police believe that "this factor contributed to the tiger escaping from its enclosure and attacking its victims," she said.

much, much more…

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/article?f=/c/a/2008/01/17/BAEIUH4B9.DTL

I'd say 90-95% of the comments on the articles in the S.F. Chronicle on this subject are pro-tiger, too.

stupid kids. :eyes:

...which is why the zoo is entirely to blame for its failure to protect the tiger from the public, which includes all kinds.

In some cases felines are smarter than people.

criminals' acts impacts all of us.

the tiger was there for four years. And now all of a sudden one jumps out for no reason?
no, not without provocation. if you make yourself look like prey, gee, guess what? Something is
gonna bite you.

I should think have been "provoked" in this manner many times in 7 decades. By this reasoning, tiger attacks should have been a monthly occurrence.

And parents who taught their children right from wrong. And if they didn't, schools had ethics classes.

Now? Drunks in BMWs out for a happy afternoon of tiger taunting.

The human race has deteriorated so much in the past few years.

When I was a kid in the 1970's, we would have offered the tiger a toke and a "peace, brother". Things were more innocent then.

Sorry, I don't believe that.

People behave oddly for a lot of reasons, including mental illness. If you think there was not a crazy person who went to the zoo in that time, you might qualify.

How many people ever thought that the risk of an insane or emotionally unstable person at a zoo was that a tiger would get into a public area?

But they are no better mannered than everyone else.

"And parents who taught their children right from wrong."

You're a total drooling fool if you don't think parents do that now.

"Now? Drunks in BMWs out for a happy afternoon of tiger taunting."

People got drunk, drove drunk, drove BMWs drunk and taunted tigers decades ago.

...and performing monkeys tethered to street organs.

Dogfighting, bullfighting, and chicken fighting (why do you think Delaware's state bird is a fighting hen).

The treatment of animals in zoos by these "previous generations" was atrocious.

with the children. And never have I seen drunken asses standing on the wall shouting and screaming at the animals. not at any of the enclosures. and people, haven't you ever been to a zoo?
there is not just a wall, there is the area where the animals are, there is a moat and that is where the
the 12 foot wall is and then there is more planted area and dirt and then there is another
shorter wall to observe the animals and that is where the assholes were standing. tigers don't just decide to jump out. you have to attract them some way. the incident with the trainer happened because these are wild animals and you cannot make a mistake when you are hadling them.
Even Siegfried and Roy will tell you that. I'd have bit those jerks myself!

They were trespassing. Three people went into the enclosure itself, so that there was nothing but a moat between them and the tiger. That was stupid. It was also cruel to taunt an animal.

Yes, the zoo should have made sure that the tiger couldn't get out. But the people who were attacked are definitely culpable in this incident. I'm sad that one of them died. I'm also very sad that the tiger died.

I'm pro-tiger.

Moral of the story: don't taunt animals.

And that amounts to what percentage of the tiger enclosure's 24,500 day history?

but decided to react just this once. :eyes:

Of course Roy's tiger was performing in the act for six years, and then attacked him, "just this once."
Imagine that.
:eyes:

Over the sixty-seven year period. Once every hundred days hardly seems unlikely, given the number of people that pass through a zoo every year, and the magnificence of tigers. Plus, if any animal is likely to bring out the "macho posturing" that exists in most young males, it is the tiger. So "taunting" shouldn't be a rare event.

I saw a tiger in a zoo once (in Duluth Minnesota, of all places). It was a very small enclosure, concrete with iron bars. It was a sad sight.

I felt bad just looking at the poor animal. Beats me how it felt. For all I know, just looking was a sort of taunting. Jailing it and putting it on display in the first place was a sort of taunting, in my opinion.

Oops, I forgot. All tigers have exactly the same temperment and the only factor that influences their moods is the throng of slack-jawed yokels on the other side of the fence.

from what i understand, siberian tigers are a little more "athletic"(?), if the enclosure was designed for and usually housed bengal tigers- that might be part of the problem as well.
the tiger that attacked was a siberian, wasn't it?

44 years of frequent San Francisco Zoo vists to that very enclosure, but so did my entire family, all my friends, all my classmates, and all the other 100s of thousands of visitors over the years. :shrug:

What made us so damned special??

I know that railing they are talking about and I sincerely doubt that they could simply stand on the top of it as they are claiming -- the pipe's not more that a few inches across -- impossible to balance on without some sort of support. A footprint on the top rail, and blood on the sign behind the rail says to me they were beyond the rail and towards the edge of the moat.

There is still much to learn about what happened that night...

Yes, these guys were assholes. But no, that mom in the late 90s wasn't and she had a near miss.

I can't believe some are defending these idiots here...

but then again, even tho it all looks pretty bad for them, that's what the trial is for...there WILL be a trial won't there?

There will be a civil suit against the zoo, which I imagine the zoo will settle out of court.

Tatiana was born at the Denver Zoo and those of us here got to enjoy seeing her grow as a young cub. And now she is dead, thanks to some stupid punks.

where she was taught to sit, stay, down, and come so as to facilitate vet care.

Did the necropsy report also include the incident last year when the tiger chewed the crap out of a handler's arm? Ya think that was caused by taunting, too?

Little kids. Bratty six year olds. Crying four year olds having obnoxious throwing, yelling, screaming tantrums. Mentally disabled. Tourette's syndrome suffers. Mentally ill. Schizophrenic ranters who can go on for hours. Drunks. Zoos get em all. Which ones deserve what they get when a tiger can take no more?

Tigers should not be able to get out. No matter what.

Any handler who gets careless around animals is subject to harm. Witness Steve Irwin, or Marlin Perkins, who was bitten by snakes and other animals numerous times. The woman who fed Tatiana stuck her hand back in after inserting the meat. Try that with a dog.

know that's how the dogs are tested to determine if they are suitable for adoption. Usually when a hand goes near the dog's food dish, if the dog attacks the hand, then the dog will be put down. The dog is said to have food aggression, and is not a candidate for adoption.

but dogs are domesticated animals. A lot of the dogs they pick up on Animal Planet are pit bulls trained to fight. A tiger cannot be expected to not guard his food. My dog is very good that way - with me - but not with other dogs.

I met a guy appearing at a pet shop who wrote a book about his pet wolf, which accompanied him. He spoke before groups about his wolf, and even though the wolf appeared tame, he said he would never appear at an event where there was food being served. They have a very strong food-guarding instinct. At the pet shop, the wolf walked around like a big dog and picked out any chewie toy he liked. He even puts his head out the car window.

He was a very sweet dog and great with children, but he would bite if you put your hand near his food.

She does NOT tolerate that!

The beagle taught the cats to stay clear of his food, and we put the cats' food up high to avoid battles.

But she's not willing to show them that level of consideration!

Both the zoo and the punks are to blame. The tiger was just being a tiger. :cry:

n/t

enough.

Just cause something passed inspection, doesn't necessarily means it's safe.
For example, Minnesota bridge that collapsed passed inspection.
Are you going to argue it was perfectly safe?
And never mind that it collapsed?

lawyer brothers.

I thought you meant those rotten drunken useless punks.

Peterson. :eyes:

he's the one that set up the boat display in the parking lot during the peterson trial

That "really guilty" defendants aren't entitled to an attorney, or that Geragos didn't do an adequate job of defending him?

Peterson was found guilty. This upset you why?

...there's no way the tiger should have been able to get out, PERIOD.

that'll make you feel better.

For their own safety dangerous animals should not be able to get out. Period.

And when did we value animal life over human how sick is that????

2. depends on the human, depends on the non-human animal which one's life i value more

YMMV

A good zoo would have taken that fact into account, and built their cages according to standard safety regulations. The bottom line is, the construction of the tiger cage or enclosure was substandard and extremely dangerous. The walls were built 4 feet shorter than thyy should have been. There were no surveillance cameras to monitor the activity in or around the enclosure. Makes me wonder who had the contract to build the zoo's tiger cage and who approved it?

The victims were making faces and growling sounds at the tigers, according to witnesses.
How such mild teasing could be considered an act of provocation by so many, that it somehow clears the zoo of it's own gross negligence is beyond me.

even if -- especially if -- they become enraged.

I don't care what the young men SAID to the tiger. The zoo should have a had a safe enclosure, and it didn't. What if that tiger, enraged by those young men or by something else earlier in the day -- had jumped on and attacked the first people it could grab? And those people were a young mother and her baby? That could just as easily have happened.

Let's get real. Witnesses have described these three men as behaving in a very aggressive manner toward the animals in the zoo. They were drunk. They admit to standing on the wall - where they left boot prints. Who knows what else they were doing?

I think that they were taunting and abusing the animal, which is sickening. Animals in zoos are powerless. This tiger turned out not to be quite as powerless as everyone thought. She died for it. I'm mad at the stupid, cruel fools who did this.

the tiger should not have been able to escape, period.

Who knows what a "safe" enclosure is for a tiger? Anyone who visits a zoo takes a certain amount of risk. Not as much risk as they take driving to the zoo, however.

I'm sure that the zoo will pay a hefty amount to settle this case. They're clearly liable. Morally, though, I know where I place the blame.

Zoo officials get off scott free for their negligence while the tiger pays the ultimate price for natural behavior. Something is wrong with this picture.

Are you also mad at the people who did not have this animal in an exhibit secure enough to save it's life? Bottom line is this tiger died because of the negligence of those who run the zoo.

Wild, dangerous animals kept in captivity must be protected from their own instinctual behavior. The zoo officials failed in their duty to the animal.

IMHO they were probably doing more than just taunting. From the OP article:

An autopsy conducted by a zoo veterinarian on the Siberian tiger after police shot it to death showed that the animal had been "very determined to get out," Matthews said. Its claws were broken and splintered by clambering up the concrete moat wall, Matthews quoted the veterinarian as saying.

I also have to wonder if the zookeepers had any culpability. Last week when 2 other animals nearly escaped there was a report the keepers were throwing empty darts at an animal to get it to go in its night enclosure. I had to wonder if they did that with the cats. Then if these brothers and their friends came along and not only taunted but threw something at the tiger that might have been the last straw with her.

I still think though they have a case cause it is the zoo's responsibility short of someone climbing in to an animal's enclosure to ensure that the enclosure can prevent an escape even of an agitated animal.

simply by looking at it the wrong way.

The same is true for any wild predatory animal.

The police removed signs that were located beyond the fence to the enclosure that had bloodstains. They're being tested.

(snip)

Zoo official: Police took bloodied sign, post in tiger mauling probe

San Francisco police took a bloodied sign and post from just inside the tiger exhibit at the zoo as evidence in the Christmas Day mauling that killed a San Jose teen, zoo officials said today.

San Francisco Zoo spokesman Sam Singer confirmed police took the sign - which lists facts about Siberian tigers - after they discovered on Dec. 27 that it was smeared with blood.

Singer said that someone at the zoo likely would have noticed the blood on the sign if it had been there before the attack.

more…
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_7999436

Something about a "bloody sign post" INSIDE the enclosure.

We'll just have to wait and see whose blood it is & how it got there.

Do you really think that these punks could climb out of twelve foot walls with a tiger mauling them? It's a given that the tiger was powerful and enraged beyond belief. I just don't think it would attack someone who climbed into it's territory and just sat back while the dipwads climbed back out. Then as an after thought decided to have another bite so climbed out too.

but possibly inside the enclosure - within the fence at the top of the pit, so there was no fence between them and the 12-ft. wall.

I haven't been there so I don't know how it's built. I'm just thinking that where ever there was blood there should have been a body. I can't imagine a raging tiger letting go once it had the object of it's anger it it's jaws.

Like a lot of people I'm tired living in a world populated by jerk punks but equally tiresome are people who think death is a satisfactory punishment for stupidity. That zoo is charged with protecting their animals as well as their visitors. Now they have a dead kid and a dead tiger. It needs to be thoroughly examined and fixed before other animals die not brushed off as deserved due to the bad behavior of the customers.

Almost anything is possible.

Maybe these guys threw stuff at the tiger, driving her into hiding or out of sight.

They then climb down for more fun but flee when the tiger starts to move at them.

Prehaps they were armed with throwable objects & maybe even the sign.

The blood on the sign could be the tiger's from where someone wallopped her. That could've stunned her enough to allow them time to scramble up & out of the enclosure.

The tiger could've then followed their route.

Maybe the tiger was so threatened & pumped up she experienced the "super-human" strength that sometimes occurs when people are in hairy situations and that allowed her to scale otherwise unscalable walls.

That might explain her damaged claws.

threatened? HTF did you come up with this stuff? What strength do you think the tiger normally has?
:eyes:

Should I have said "supertiger" strength? Or maybe "supertigress"?

This'll get ya started. http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/archive/index.php/t-144359.html It's the proverbial mother lifting a car off her child scenario.

Is it not possible the same phemonena occurs in animals as well as humans?

how the heck does one 'climb down a 12 foot wall and then climb back out??'

Unless they are Spiderman?

Just another laughable attempt by management to cover their asses.

I was very disturbed when I read about the handler's taunting and harassment of other animals after the tiger incident. Makes me think that there is a real problem in the education and experience of the employees. I'm thinking they are trying to save money by hiring the lowest wage employees they can get and on going training could be severely deficient.

When this was posted last week, about the polar bear that had empty tranquilizer darts thrown at her to try to get her locked in back, I pointed out that the article specifically said "zoo officials" were involved. And that her keepers were not called in to move her. Zoo officials can be any one on the vet staff, or any of the supervisory staff (above keepers). While there are always exceptions, animal care staff (keepers) at US zoos are well trained and reasonably well paid, and care deeply for the animals in their care. Problems result because of management that does not listen to the concerns of the keepers, who are the front line of defense for these animals. Trust me on this one, I have 30 years of experience in this field.

Even animals can have their bad days.

:shrug:

<Earlier this month, the younger Sousa's mother, Marilza Sousa, said in an interview that Paul Dhaliwal had told her, "We didn't do nothing. We were just normal kids in the zoo."

She added, "That's what happened - just dancing, talking, laughing like normal kids."

"That's what happened - just dancing, talking, laughing like normal kids.">

Like drunk and stoned normal idiot kids intentionally agitating a caged animal! Is that really normal for kids today? Sadly....

particularly those of college age.

What era are we in, the 1950s?

maybe YOURS, but not in OURS...

frankly, the juvinile DELIQUENTS deserved all they got - I just hope they don't end up getting any money from anybody...for THEIR stupid actions...

You really want to pretend that you use that kind of language yet never heard of young people getting high and going out to enjoy the amusement of zoos and such?

One is already in trouble with the law and has a case pending for drunkeness, leading police on a car chase, then resisting arrest by running from the scene after crashing into a tree. He then shoved an officer and kicked out the partition in the police car. He didn't quiet down until a stun gun was held against his neck. The others also have a rap sheet, even Carlos, who was arrested for drunk driving minus a license.

Imagine these guys with money. They'll buy an Escalade and blow the rest on drugs and booze. They'll be in the news again. Of course, Geragos will charge a bundle.

Are you a member of the Taliban by any chance?

I have seen lots of people on the fence at the Chicago zoos, it's only three feet high. Kids growl and make faces at the big cats all the time; people with little kids who can't see the tigers stand there balancing their kids on top of the little fence. Everyone assumes the tigers CAN'T GET OUT. I'm sure those kids did, too. To say that kid deserved to die for standing on a fence growling or even yelling at a zoo animal, like thousands of kids have done before seems pretty cruel.

Our values are realy messed up when we value animals over people

I don't know any teenagers - much less a 24 year old man, as one of these "victims" is - who would behave like this.

I'm mad that the zoo didn't kick them off the premises before this happened. Poor supervision. The animals should be protected from idiots taunting them.

to call the police?

With such a record of gross negligence, it makes me wonder how that zoo is treating its animals. The zoo deserves to be sued by the victims for every penny it has, and then should be permanently shut down.

and it was shut down.

has such a poorly built tiger enclosure either. So they wouldn't need the cameras, now would they?

they have no security whatsover. They are absolutely culpable.

On the other hand if these kids were on the fence, stepping over the fence and taunting the tire than they are culpable also. They don't deserve a dime.

It has gotten to the point in this country that no one is responsible for their actions and this is a prime example.

one of whom as bleeding from a head wound -- to stay outside. And the tiger found them there and attacked them a second time, while they were desperately begging for help to come.

That they couldn't get in to the cafe.

As for the zoo, it closes at five, but the patrons have one hour to leave.

and two scary-looking guys in gang regalia came banging on your door demanding to come in, would you open the door? They did the right thing by calling security. Why take a chance on being robbed - or worse? If you yelled and banged on the door would your bank unlock the door and let you in 3 minutes after closing time?

It appears she attacked one of the brothers first, then killed the 17 year old, then tracked the brothers down to the cafe and attacked the other one. I imagine on her journey to track the brothers it's quite possible she passed other people.

only in those who had tormented her.

At least, that is my interpretation.

And dark of evening or close to it. I doubt they had that many visitors at the time for her to pass.

This is a totally crappy situation for all involved especially for the boy and the tiger.
While I sympathize with the folks that were killed and mauled, if you fuck with a tiger don't be surprised when it tries to take a bite out of you.
I really don't think that they need to pursue any criminal action in this case unless there was a homicide. I mean these guys got freaking mauled by a tiger. Punishment has already been served in my opinion.

i guess there's mean ones too.

It was the PANTHER, Bagheera who was a good guy....

will finally tell the truth.

(snip)

Anthony Colonnese, noting he had worked at the zoo since 1971 and was very familiar with the tiger exhibit, said he examined the grotto a few days after the attack "looking for things that did not belong in the grotto."

He said he paid close attention to the part of the grotto "where I knew the two Siberian tigers were in the habit of resting after their mid-afternoon feeding."

In that area, "I found two stones," he said. "One stone was made up of a smooth material that was different from any of the rocks or gunite that make up the grotto exhibit."

Colonnese also said he found a medium-sized steel washer in the bottom of the moat. "I am informed that the keeper responsible for the Siberian tiger grotto inspected the grotto the morning of Dec. 25," he said, suggesting the washer ended up in the moat after.

A letter from the city attorney's office says officials want to examine the brothers' car to determine "whether there are washers in the vehicle that match the washer found in the grotto."

more…
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_7999436

...not to have protected the tiger from people throwing things.

Sorry, I'm on the tiger's side in this one. If the zoo had done its job, the tiger would be alive.

at the animals.

Staring at a predator is enough to provoke it to violence.

Maybe, just maybe, confining these animals for public display is generally not in the best interests of these animals.

zoos are about people being able to see the animals up close.

simple as that.

The father told the police what he said to him. Who knows what they'll come up with in court.

Nonetheless, the zoo's protection of public safety was inadequate.

I was at the zoo yesterday. A 5 year old was shrieking with laughter at our tiger exhibit.

Total morons commit foolish act, reality turns on them, someone dies. It happens every day. It's called "thinning the herd." Ever see Jackass?

They asked for it. They got it. They lied about it. They got caught. End of story.

contained in such an enclosure that it can not get out. If it's acceptable for the animal to get out because it was upset at teasing, it then might attack a person or persons that were not teasing it. This tiger, from the time line, was running around at that zoo for quite some time before being killed. During that time it could have attacked anyone it met.
I fail to see how it should be acceptable for the zoo to keep an animal in such an enclosure that it can get out if it feels like it because it is really upset at someone.

But my impression is that at least one of the drunken morons went inside the enclosure to wave his arms and scream at the animal, possibly throwing things as well. Although the zoo indeed should have had a higher wall, the incident itself was precipitated by the morons, not the zoo or the tiger.

Perhaps the morons are blameless victims of blatant lawbreaking by the zoo, but I'm having trouble seeing it that way. Maybe I would feel different if they were graduate students in astronomy or something, although a respectable, normal person would never waste their time in such foolish, dangerous pursuits.

At some point, people have to be responsible for the consequences of their actions. These morons taunted a wild animal until it attacked them. What did they expect?

"""These morons taunted a wild animal until it attacked them. What did they expect?"""

They expected the animals could not get out. What would you expect?

Imagine you are moseying along at the tiger exhibit and the family in front of you have a two year who has had a long day. Youngster is in need of a nap and as the tantrum starts the whole world realizes it, too. Just as the tears begin to flow in ernest, the family makes haste to leave and the crying turns to howls of distress as the tiger perks up because that sounds just like an injured animal that instinct tells him would make a wonderful lunch.

You are near a family arousing a wild animal until it wants to attack them. What would you expect?

Would you expect that you'd better get the heck out of Dodge before tiger climbs the wall and kills you all? Or would you just be somewhat annoyed at the bothersome noise of a two year old and remain comfortable enough to stay until you've finished enjoying your trip to the zoo?

After all, if you treat them real nice they would never attack you, would they?

So why have any kind of barriers at all?

The hate here is awesome! Just my kind of thing.

their OWN stupidity got their friend killed and a beautiful animal murdered.

fucking assholes

:nuke:

Never mind the wall was actually four feet shorter than recommended.

crazy tiger for no reason whatsoever just leaped out of the enclosure totally unexpectedly and without warning or provocation!!!

I DON'T fault the zoo ... that enclosure, while perhaps not the legal limit, had been FINE for years.

Stupid assholes brought this on themselves.

because something was fine for years, then it's perfectly safe. Minnesota bridge was fine for years, then it collapsed. Chernobyl was fine for years, and then it blew up.

not on that Christmas day because it would entail holiday pay.

We are so screwn here.

no room left for idiots.....

I'm just not inclined to be sympathetic to drunken jackasses who were most likely throwing shit at the tiger.

The hate here is awesome! Just my kind of thing.

I prefer animals to drunken jackasses.

They were abusing the animal... If they are stupid enough to piss off a tiger then they are too stupid to live...

Enough with your sticking up for the idiots.

There are two parties involved both were ignorant but only one was educated.

:(

These Hoodlums needed to show a little restraint... Just like when you come up to my Pit Bull on the street... Don't tease it or harass it and it will leave you alone... but if you do mess with it then you get whats comin to ya....

The hate here is awesome! Just my kind of thing.

Wow talk about being ignorant.

I once had the opportunity to visit a large animal refuge in Terrell, TX. One of my best friends owns about 20 or 30 acres of land adjoining it, and we've been going camping there for about 25 years. One afternoon not long after the refuge was built, we stood at a very respectful distance and were able to see a few lions, a few tigers, and a pack of wolves.

The owner approached us shortly thereafter and after introductions were made, she invited us over to see everything-- a personal tour if you will. Most of the animals had been used in films prior to their presence in Terrel and many were quite old.

The other guys soon got bored with it, but I found it more than amazing. After my friends had left, the noise died down and the animals relaxed, the owner allowed me to get up close to one old lioness. She told that if I signed a disclaimer, she'd allow me to pet the cat. I quickly agreed and when we returned to the pens, she opened the gate and instructed me how to gingerly approach the animal, face down-- never looking at it directly in the eye until my head was lower than its.

It was an amazing experience, sitting on the ground with a lion's head in my lap, as though it were nothing more than a great big lap dog. Honest to God, I could feel and hear it purring as I scratched and petted it between the ears. It's purrs were INCREDIBLY loud. Not to the extent of a lawnmower-- bit closer to that than a barking dog. I don't have the creativity or the ability to write for you how that experience moved me to a degree that I'd never thought possible.

The owner looked at her watch and whispered that the feeding bell would be going off in five minutes and that I would have to gently remove myself. As I was slowly removing the cat's head from my lap, it began to get a little playful and bit my arm-- not a BITE per se, but a playful nip with no discomfort at all to me (I once had a wonderful dog that would do the same thing-- I'm sure a lot of you do too). As I was slowly standing up, the cat actually placed both paws on my shoulder and began licking my neck.

Anyway, as soon as I was out of the pen, the owner locked it and the feeding bell soon went off. The change in the cat was dramatic-- it suddenly roared (being three feet from a lion's roar allows you to realize how very puny we as humans really are), got up, arched its back and became very agitated. The change in its demeanor was dramatic to say the least. I understood why, even with a signed disclaimer the owner wouldn't want me in the pen as it seemed that by this point as it seemed that by this point, the lion wouldn't make a whit of difference between its food and me.

That's when she (the owner) imparted to me what she said were words she was forced to live by for her own safety: "Don't blame animals for acting like animals-- regarldess of whether they're content and purring, or agitated and stressed." I imagine the concomitant of that statement is true also-- If a person starts acting like an animal rather than a human, we have the capacity to both assign and receive blame, something the great cat's are incapable of.

The guys at this zoo exceeded the reasonable expectations of what zoo patrons should do. The cat never exceeded the expectations of what cats do. Seems to me that the kids in question were to blame. I feel bad for the death of one of them and I feel bad for their ignorance, but if one is going to act like an animal around a tiger, expect the the tiger to act like an animal too...

I'm sure it was quite an experience.

I've lived with house cats all my life. Most of the time they are sweet, gentle, fun creatures. But they can turn in an instant. Sometimes when I've been playing with one of my cats it will suddenly become very aggressive. Most people who live with cats will know what I mean. One minute they're frolicking. The next minute they are stone killers advancing on the human, biting and growling. In those moments I have never had any doubt that if they were the size of tigers, I'd be dead.

Of course the zoo is liable. The wall was too short according to today's requirements. Those requirements didn't exist when the zoo was built - because nobody really knows what a safe enclosure is for a tiger. However, tiger attacks are rare in zoos because most of the time the animals aren't enraged enough to find a way out. Something enraged this tiger to the point where she did something no tiger has ever done at that enclosure in the fifty years since the zoo was built.

what these guys claim they were doing. This cat expert agrees:

Expert: Yelling, throwing objects would not likely provoke a tiger

Something beyond yelling or throwing rocks must have prompted Siberian tiger Tatiana to scale the wall of her San Francisco Zoo grotto on Christmas Day, a tiger expert said today.

Rick Glassey, who has trained and handled big cats for 34 years, told the Mercury News that a tiger might be enticed to climb out if "Let's say somebody was hanging from that enclosure. She would find herself jumping up there."

But hurling objects? "Possibly," Glassey said, but more likely a tiger facing a barrage would want to simply walk the other way. And a tiger probably wouldn't be provoked by humans roaring or making odd noises: "Cats are used to that kind of thing," he said.

"I would say it's something really getting the cat's attention," said Glassey, whose tiger, Jake, starred in "Dr. Doolittle" and leopard Kaboe was featured in Disney's "Jungle Book" movies.

(snip)

"They're secure in their enclosures, they don't think about leaving" he said. "That's where they were raised, that's their home."

more…
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_8010609

The 16-foot figure against which the 12-foot 5-inch walls of the exhibit in question have been compared is only a recommendation by an accrediting organization, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA).

thank you for sharing it. Yep, thats some wise advice- "don't blame animals for acting like animals". I see the behavior of a lion in my little housecats and I am quite grateful that I am much larger.

The hate here is awesome! Just my kind of thing.

i doubt you'd be missed....

Lots of stuff here:

http://www.bayareanewsgroup.com/multimedia/mn/news/tiger_searchwarrant_011808.pdf

paraphrasing..

a male and female reported throwing rocks at the lions, which is right next to the siberian exhibit.

4-5 young men harassing monkeys

penguins by 4-5 possible gang members

birds and gorillas taunted and teased by 4-5 unknown individuals.

I'll give it that maybe these guys were some of the 4-5's and the chick split after throwing the rocks at the lions. But they can't make an ID on them, so...
Either they were going around harassing all the animals with some friends, which pictures and/or video from their cell phones might show, or they just got there after the other ones were teasing the tiger and it this time when it came back out and saw them fuckin around it was pissed from the others.
How could all this be unnoticed by zoo employees? If it's them that gave the report, how can they not know if it was the same people?

Everyone teases the monkeys. stupid monkeys.

taunting animals, if those reports are accurate. I would think that three men are not likely to be mistaken for a man and a woman.
Research showed that 20-25 % of zoo visitors taunt the animals.
"Marc Bekoff, a professor emeritus at the University of Colorado at Boulder, said students in his animal behavior courses during the 1990s found that 20 percent to 25 percent of zoo visitors taunted the animals by mimicking, yelling, and throwing things at them."
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/01/19/research_taunting_is_common_at_zoos/

Just a common thing. People "tease" the animals all the time. An employee might tell them to stop, but it is common for people to try to get a reaction from the animal.
Good thing the penguins didn't get out.

zoo visitors to taunt the animals. If it were acceptable for the animals to get out of their enclosures if they were being teased, considering that research showed 20-25% of zoo visitors taunt the animals, there could be a lot of dead or injured zoo visitors.
By the way, the search of the cell phones and the car apparently didn't yield any evidence of a crime, if this report is correct.
"On Wednesday, police investigators searched the car and the cell phones belonging to the two brothers who survived the attack that killed 17-year-old Carlos Sousa Jr. of San Jose. They recovered no direct evidence to support a theory that either Paul Dhaliwal, 19, or Kulbir Dhaliwal, 23, of San Jose had taunted the Siberian tiger before it attacked, authorities close to the case say."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/19/MNKDUHQRQ.DTL&tsp=1

I'm upset that all those animals were harassed that day, apparently without anyone at the zoo intervening. I hope that San Francisco looks into staffing and management at the zoo. Animals in cages can't defend themselves. It's sickening to think of people throwing rocks at them and abusing them.

Sounds like something the guys in the movie "Jackass" would do. :shrug:

They killed their friend, and they did not come clean or cooperate when they could have.

I catch a buzz at the zoo and try to get the tigers attention the "wrong way", it escapes, hunts me down and attacks me, forcing the cops to come in and kill it.
I won't be reading the threads about my drunken idiocy at the zoo.

Everyone wants to blame the victims.
Fuck the victims, a tiger is dead.
They are both the victims, the zoo is the guilty party.
Regardless of who did what, both the tiger and the people should have been safe. How can people not agree on that?
Instead call a dead kid on Christmas day a fucking drunken punk with no morals? An idiot that got what he deserved?

The kids were knuckleheads and they caused the attack

...but the tiger should have never got out

The kids and the zoo are both at fault.

50% responsible, that still leaves zoo liable for the other 50%, as far as I understand the law. Victims being partly responsible would reduce the amount of damages awarded, but not eliminate it.

No contributory negligence (usually).

Oh yeah. I did.

Is there a "patting yourself on the back" emiticon?

Never mind all the countless speculations of how the tiger got out, false report and rumors of what was found, and a bunch of experts and zoo oficials speculating an animal must have been provoked. You've got an amazing power of deduction.

:eyes:

Wish I could find that thread. It would be fun to revisit. Lots of outrage over those who dared to state the obvious. How unfair and predjudiced we were to write that the victims brought it upon themselves without having "evidence" that they had.

As I recall, there was a lot of speculation as to what exactly they've done to the tigers, including false rumors about slingshots, lasers, and leg dangling. The tiger was supposed to have miraculously attached herself to leg(s) and gotten out that way.
All you've got now is screaming and waiving, and even that is hearsay evidence.

Whatever BS you heard about slingshots, lasers or dangling legs is of absolutely no consequence.

The same goes for the meaningless study you cited elsewhere in this thread that reports up to 25% of zoo visitors immitate the animals they see in some manner, no matter how benign.

What the police have are eyewitness reports of young men taunting animals near the time and location of the attacks and a footprint proving that at least one of the victims refused to stay behind a fence and approached the tiger within a few feet of the wall.

Eye contact, position and proximity are key factors in animal response, so mimicking the tiger loudly, from a superior position and closer than the animal was used to could forseeably set off the animal and trigger an attack.

The police also have medical reports showing that all three had alcohol and illegal drugs in their systems. While not proof of any misbehavior with regard to the tiger, any reasonable person would expect that a trio of blitzed and doped-up guys who were all technically in the zoo after closing time and including one known to have scaled a fence outside the exhibit were probably the same ones seen taunting animals earlier.

The father of the 17-year-old who was killed in the incident has nothing to gain from making up a story about the surviving brothers having admitted to him that they taunted the tiger. If anything the story weakens his position. It is believable.

When I was 19 or 20, I got myself into a whammy of an auto accident. Don't recall too much, but they had to chop the passenger door off to extract me, the car ended up twisted like a bannana.

How did this happen? I was working 2nd shift, a tough night. Ended up having to stay an extra 2 hours. Was very PO'd on the way home.

It was a nice car, a blue/silver Shelby Charger. Some clown in a station wagon tried to pass me on the road perhaps 1/2 mile from home. No way I was going to allow someone in such an ugly POS show me up!

We got into a race, probably got 'er up to 100 - 110 mph. The stop sign came up much too quickly. Tried to stop and lost it, hit a tree. The kid in the wagon then piled into the back of my car. If I didn't have my belt on, I would not be posting this - the belt broke my collar bone from the impact. Can still feel the lump where the bone grew back together 25 years later.

The case went to court, somehow it was determined fault was 60/40 againts the other guy. My lawer asked how agressively I wanted to pursue. I settled for $4500, the value of the car (used) and lost wages. Felt damned lucky (and a tad guilty) to get anything at all.

I never felt compelled to sue the other guy for more, or go after Chrysler (they made a defective and dangerous car - sarcasm) or the town (poorly designed roads). I realized the entire incident could have been avoided had I not been such a dumb ass in the first place.

Back to the tiger thing, could the enclosure been better designed? Probably so, the critter should not have been able to escape. OTOH, this would not have happened had the animal not been taunted by drunken fools. Some amount is probably due, but the kids and thier families do not deserve the millions thier lawyer will most likely request IMHO.

I'm glad that you and the other driver survived.

I've been thinking about some of the posts that blame the zoo entirely and refuse to even consider that the taunters contributed to the tiger attack. That's the kind of attitude that the Republican Party has successfully laid on Democrats - that we've abandoned the idea of individual responsibility, that we're too ready to blame the authorities, and expect everyone else to take care of us.

I'm glad to see so many progressives on this board pointing out the obvious. Clearly, this tiger was provoked into escaping and attacking. While the zoo is liable for not having a proper enclosure, the three people who were attacked are also clearly at fault for precipitating a tragic incident that never would have occurred if they hadn't set out to cause trouble.

I re-read my post, I did neglect to say the other driver was ok - he came out of it uninjured. Had he not, my feelings of guilt would have been compounded.

If the "yoots" walked around a corner and been jumped by the cat (theoretically allowed to escape), the situation would be completly different. In that scenario, a very large settlement (jailtime?) would of course be warranted.

...that some crazy person will encourage a tiger to get into a public area?

I'd rather we establish a rule that zoos should be held responsible for tigers getting out - period.

I would have waited until an investigation revealed the facts, much like in a human court room.
Now the tiger seems to have been vindicated.

Still, I'm very sad about the death of the kid.

I guess they didn't feel like they could have waited until after conducting an investigation. Maybe next time they will try to take the tiger into custody first.
:eyes: