Tiger attack = major buzzkill

[thrackelsby]

Police: Tiger attack victim acknowledged drinking, some taunting
By Terence Chea
ASSOCIATED PRESS
11:07 a.m. January 18, 2008
SAN FRANCISCO – Police believe a fatal tiger attack at the San Francisco Zoo was
in part prompted by the victims provoking the animal, according to court documents.
One of the three victims told the father of the teenager killed in the Christmas Day
attack they had been drinking and were yelling and waving at the animal, according to a search warrant affidavit filed late Thursday.

Paul Dhaliwal, 19, insisted the three never threw anything into the tiger's pen
to provoke the cat, the papers said. Dhaliwal and his brother Kulbir, 24, were
severely injured when the tiger crawled up the wall of its enclosure and
mauled them. Their friend, 17-year-old Carlos Sousa, Jr., was killed.
Zoo officials have acknowledged the wall surrounding the tiger pen was
four feet lower than recommended by the national zoo accrediting
organization.

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

Sousa's father, Carlos Sousa Sr., said Dhaliwal told him the three stood on a
3-foot-tall metal railing a few feet from the edge of the tiger moat.
“When they got down they heard a noise in the bushes, and the tiger was
jumping out of the bushes on him (Paul Dhaliwal),” the documents said.
Police found a partial shoe print that matched Paul Dhaliwal's on top of the
railing, Matthews said in the documents.
The affidavit also cites multiple reports to police of people taunting animals
at the zoo that day.

Mark Geragos, an attorney for the Dhaliwal brothers, did not immediately
return calls for comment. He has repeatedly said they did not provoke the tiger.
Michael Cardoza, the attorney who represents the Sousa family, said Friday
he had not seen the affidavit and would not comment on the allegations.
But, he said, even if the men had provoked the animal, smoked marijuana
or drank alcohol, that would not justify the attack or lessen the zoo's liability.
“The zoo has the obligation to protect the public from the animals and to
protect the animals from the public,” Cardoza said. “They did not live up
to that obligation. They are strictly liable for not properly housing that
tiger. It has to be foreseeable to them that people are going to do silly
things at the zoo.”

Toxicology results for Paul Dhaliwal showed that his blood alcohol level was
0.16 – twice the legal limit for driving, according to the affidavit. His brother
and Sousa also had alcohol in their blood but within the legal limit, Matthews wrote.
All three also had marijuana in their systems, Matthews said. Kulbir Dhaliwal
told police the three had smoked pot and each had “a couple shots of vodka”
before leaving San Jose for the zoo Dec. 25, the affidavit said.
Police found a small amount of marijuana in Kulbir Dhaliwal's 2002 BMW,
which the victims rode to the zoo, as well as a partially filled bottle of vodka,
according to court documents.
Investigators also recovered messages and images from the men's cell phones.
Zoo spokesman Sam Singer said he had not seen the documents but believed
the victims did taunt the animal.

“Those brothers painted a completely different picture to the public and the press,”
Singer said. “Now it's starting to come out that what they said is not true.”

I am of the opinion that if the stories related by the defendants is true, than
the zoo is liable. no matter what the defendants were doing. If they didn't provide a new
exit from the area, than the tiger getting out was not their fault.

[hoodabudda]

looks like some trolls went to the zoo and forgot they didnt have a computer screen to hide behind....