SF Zoo tiger attack - Page 5 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Hatterasguy · #61 01-17-2008, 12:39 AM

Wow what a very Roman way to get information out of terrorists and reduce there population.

Torture whats that? They are just sitting on a rope swing, and its getting closer to the ground so its safe!

Zeus · #62 01-17-2008, 10:45 AM

No pity from me from any of these cases where someone taunts, gets too close, tries to hug a polar bear, etc. and ends up getting reminded of their place on the food chain.

I've seen people like this at other wildlife exhibits and zoos. The idiots who bash the cages/tanks, yell at the animals, etc. Especially deserving of the idiot badge are the parents who let their kids do it and don't stop them, thereby potentially perpetuating the behaviour through ignorance.

So I agree with Botnst et al - Follow Cave Rule #1 and don't fck with the tiger.

A264172 · #63 01-17-2008, 11:27 AM

The 'kids' got what they had coming to them. A guilty conscience and their tail between their legs. Cross a tiger and you end up dead.
The tiger did too. Go 'man killer' in the city and you get one between the eyes, that's the rule.
The only one's I feel bad for are the tigers that didn't come over the wall.

cmac2012 · #64 01-17-2008, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeus

No pity from me from any of these cases where someone taunts, gets too close, tries to hug a polar bear, etc. and ends up getting reminded of their place on the food chain.

I've seen people like this at other wildlife exhibits and zoos. The idiots who bash the cages/tanks, yell at the animals, etc. Especially deserving of the idiot badge are the parents who let their kids do it and don't stop them, thereby potentially perpetuating the behaviour through ignorance.

So I agree with Botnst et al - Follow Cave Rule #1 and don't fck with the tiger.

Oh man, I'd love to see a video of those fools pooping their pants when the tiger managed to leap the moat and deliver some primal hurt on them.

There was a good article in the Bay Area Guardian about tigers, written by a guy whose step-dad had a wild animal theme park at their farm. He made a good case for the tiger leaping across the moat rather than jumping up from the bottom of it.

Unfortunately, I have a feeling these guys are going to dig some $$ out of SF for their antics. The family of the dead young man also has a lawyer looking for a payday. I could see giving them some funds, but the fools that survived have a macho story to tell their friends. I mean, after all, how many of us today can say we survived a tiger attack?

Trakehner · #65 01-17-2008, 08:24 PM

One man told me he thought the SF Zoo might have to close down for a year or two depending on the lawsuits.

t walgamuth · #66 01-17-2008, 09:08 PM

There is no doubt in my mind that the zoo's insurance will pay a large settlement to the injured humans.

I feel sad for any animal caught in a zoo, but I am glad to be able to see them up close. A ride through safari type zoo would be better for them though and probably better for us as well, but probably would cost more to build and run. I would enjoy the challange of designing such a zoo/ park.

The kids exercised very poor judgement in taunting the tigers but don't deserve to die for it.

They should have had a lid on the cage....or the human walkway.

Tom W

Botnst · #67 01-17-2008, 09:14 PM

Put a lid on the cage and some dum***** will figure-out how to get the lid off. It may take a couple of decades but it will happen. In the Navy they used to say that if you tried to make everything fool-proof nature would design a bigger fool. Physical barriers will never suffice. All barriers depend on the common sense of the people.

It's like a locked car -- nobody can break a window, right? Why don't more auto break-in's happen? It's not because of the physical barrier, it's the psychological barrier of society's taboos.

For the vast majority of society no lock is necessary. In the same sense for the vast majority of society, no lock will withstand a society that no longer respects a lock.

B

t walgamuth · #68 01-17-2008, 11:00 PM

The jury will not agree with you.

Using your logic, it would seem that the boys jumped into the tigers cage not the other way around.

Tom W

Jim B. · #69 01-17-2008, 11:44 PM

^^^^Having been personally privy to results of their decisions for over 20 years, and to discussions about them by Judges and attorneys and Court staff, for the same amount of time, I can assure you that trial juries are UTTERLY, TOTALLY unpredictable.

An argument like Botnst's above, (He'd do well VERY well, as a trial attorney!) if presented logically and persuasively, and not countered adroitlyl, by adverse counsel, could VERY well be persuasive to them, regardless of the facts, law and Jury instructions presented to them in a case on which they were deliberating.

Oh yes.

t walgamuth · #70 01-17-2008, 11:57 PM

Well, we'll see how it plays out.

Anybody wanna bet me?

I will wager $1 that the jury will award the survivors of the boy eaten by the Tiger at least $100,000.00.

I will bet anybody who wishes up to a maximum of 25 of you.

I don't wanna get too crazy.

Tom W

Jim B. · #71 01-18-2008, 12:16 AM

What actually happens may will turn on a very unspectacular progression of number crunching sessions.

Long before they take this to trial, there will be a series of negotiations between the plaintiff lawyers, and the lawyers for the City, Zoo, and the Zoo's Insurance company.

The City's insurance company will low ball a settlement offer, and the plaintiff (after informing the client) will counter and they will go back and forth on it.

The Judge will sit in and try to get them to reach a settlement. Legal liability - which, so far from press reports, is a gray area, is something that will be resolved only at trial itself, if it ever cdomes to that.

Often as not it never does. Trial costs, preparation, jury voir dire, trial juror selection, expert witness expenses, various motions filed, the Court's time and calendar all are examples of things that mitigate taking the thing to trial

Not at all out of the realm of possibility that the case will settle, with the "plaintiffs receiving an undisclosed sum, and the City and Zoo refusing to admit any liability whatsoever".

Furthermore, even before all this, lots of times the City of San Francisco requires plaintiffs in cases like this to first "File a claim against the City of San Francisco".

99% of the time those are denied (and the lawyers file suit next.)

That is called the legal maxim of "Exhausting your administrative remedies".
You are supposed to do that first before filing a lawsuit.

In San Francisco that would take typically 6 months.

Not a stretch at all to imagine this could drag out 2-3 years

I think the strange "Knoller" case ( That huge Presa Canario dog that was owned by two lawyers that bit and killed a lesbian woman in the elevator of a Presidio Heights apartment building in SF if you remember) took at LEAST that long or more, to wrap up. I saw the Court file, in the San Francisco c ourthouse on that one, it was enormous, the filed papers took volume after volume in the Clerk's office.

t walgamuth · #72 01-18-2008, 12:24 AM

So you are saying my $1 is safe?

How did the suit come out with the killer dog?

Tom W

Jim B. · #73 01-18-2008, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

So you are saying my $1 is safe?

How did the suit come out with the killer dog?

Tom W

Seven years after it happens, the lawyers and judges are still on it after the legal appeals!!!

It was the talk of the town for a long time. A lot of people all of a sudden tried to buy these kind of huge, relatively unknown "killer dogs".

Some whackos even tried hard to buy the *actual* dog that killed the woman!!!! Sick.

The facts and dramatis personae read like un unbelievable soap opera.
It even got coverage on Court TV:

This is the basic recap of the facts. Get out your popcorn

http://www.courttv.com/trials/dogmaul/background-a_intro.html

Here' a timeline to 2004.

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/crime/criminals/noel-knoeller/

SIX YEARS LATER the legal wrangling is STILL going on, after one defendant is already out of prison on the case.

San Francisco court personnel told me that these two lawyers/defendants were among the wierdest people they had ever seen as court as lawyers who appeared there
This was last year.

http://www.nbc11.com/news/13420821/detail.html
Wouldn't suprise me a bit if the same thing happens with the Zoo tiger case.

The appeals motions and attorney fees will be coming and going in seven more years. It could easily happen again. freom my point of view.

cmac2012 · #74 01-18-2008, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trakehner

One man told me he thought the SF Zoo might have to close down for a year or two depending on the lawsuits.

I don't have any attachment to the zoo, haven't bothered to go there during the 12 years I've lived in the area, 2 or 3 of those in SF.

Maybe I'm a starry eyed fool but there are only about 500 Siberian tigers in the world now, or so they say. That one got shot over these yay-hoos is sorta disconcerting. I saw some video footage in the wild of one that the photographer considered himself lucky to get -- with a huge telescope lens and after hours-days of searching. It was climbing a snowy hill and, Sweet Jesus, what a lithe, powerful, and dangerous looking critter.

The guy in the Guardian article I spoke of said he much preferred Bengal tigers, their disposition was more likely to be affectionate. FWIW.

aklim · #75 01-18-2008, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

The family of the dead young man also has a lawyer looking for a payday.

I could see giving them some funds,

but the fools that survived have a macho story to tell their friends. I mean, after all, how many of us today can say we survived a tiger attack?

And why would this lawyer look in that direction for a payday if there aren't 12 morons who have given money for stupid reasons?

Why? You pay out for stupidity? I don't. Maybe that is why the lawyer looks for a payday. Because people like you are doling out money for stupidity. So, he goes to the city zoo and say "12 morons gave Citizen Joe $20 mil for such and so forth a case. I'll take $10 and go away or you can risk going to trial. In which case, I'll bet I can find 12 morons who will give me $20 mil." Know what? He is right, he will find the 12 morons especially in CA.

What's macho about that? That they survived and managed to escape in spite of nearly slipping on the brown stuff and yellow liquid? If they had wrestled the tiger or even shot it, that would be a story.