The Dhaliwal brothers are planning to sue the San Francisco zoo for an alleged slander campaign by their publicist where he repeatedly accused them of provoking the “big cat

I am not surprised. The SF zoo and the city attorney have displayed remarkable lack of restraint in conducting a vigorous CYA campaign without ensuring that they had proof.

The SF police who so far were saying that they had no evidence now have filed an affidavit stating that all three young men stood on the railing and yelled and waved at the tiger. Per this, the guys stood on the railing at the edge of the moat. I am not sure that this qualifies as entering the Tiger’s enclosure. More damning is the fact that all 3 had alcohol and marijuana in their blood stream.

Well, it would seem they may not have a case afterall. Wow, it really sucks when the truth comes out, doesn’t it? It’s just too bad the tiger didn’t take all 3 morons out. They admitted to being drunk and high BEFORE they even drove to the zoo! I hope they get nailed for DUI, DWI, abuse of an animal, public drunkeness, murder of an endangered species, lying to police, lying to the public, oh, the list could go on. Throw them in prison for life… or better yet, through them in with some very hungry tigers.

And lets hope the SF Zoo, the Denver zoo (from where the tiger was on loan from), Tiger rescue facilities, the SF police, the city of SF and the public countersue them to poverty.

It’s just too bad the tiger didn’t take all 3 morons out.

That is very extreme and I find it offensive. A 17 year old boy died.Have some compassion. (And yes- I do have compassion for Tatiana the tiger who died)

People do stupid things because they are people. The tiger attacked because it is a wild animal. The zoo and the police - instead of counter suing - need to figure out how an animal crossed what is supposed to be an insurmountable barrier regardless of the provocation and why the initial 911 calls were not taken seriously

Maybe because it is also coming out these kids were rude and obnoxious all day at the zoo - perhaps had they learned the lessons of “The Boy Who Cried Wolf”. I’m sick and tired of people blaming everyone else but themselves when something like this happens that they obviously brought on themselves.

I’d be a bit more sympathetic to the 17-year old if he weren’t participating in ruining a day at the zoo for everyone else by public displays of drunkeness, drug use and overall obnoxiousness.

We’ve all been to the zoo and other places where kids (and adults) like this are and the sad fact is, even when they are reported as being a disruption, there’s not much than can be done to kick them out due to the laws protecting the arrogant.

And the fact is, the zoo has had tigers there for over 50 years with nothing like this happening - Tatiana had been there for 2 years without attempting to jump over - so obviously they had to be doing something pretty drastic to aggrivate the tiger to jump out of the enclosure.

While the wall was under recommended guidelines, it was still within legal guidelines. Perhaps instead of looking at ways to keep the animals in, maybe they should look at ways to keep kids like those three out so the rest of us can enjoy places without such displays of disrespect.

Would you be sticking up for these kids if they had killed one of your family members on the road while under the influence of drugs or alcohol? It is only by sheer luck they didn’t. If they had, I don’t believe there’d be any sympathy for them at all. Please, let’s not forget the fact they were drinking and driving and under the influence of drugs while driving.

sick of them,
Do you propose a death penalty for all illegal drug users and people drunk in public :)?

I do understand the reason for your disgust at the dhaliwal brothers and the person killed, but it is hard to agree with you if you say they deserve it because they were drunk and unruly in public. Youngsters are sometimes reckless irrespective of whether they are drunk or not, you can’t wish the were all dead! And your imagination is running wild when you talk about family members being the target of kid under the influence. What answer would you expect for such a question? What if one of the three kids happened to be in your family? Would you still be sympathetic just to the tiger?

Sick,
You speak of responsiblity. What about the lack of responsiblity shown by the zoo authorities? “They antagonized the tiger and it jumped the moat and escaped the cage”. Gimme a frickin break!
I do believe it is the responsiblity of the zoo authorities to ensure the safety of their clientile. If a tiger can jump a moat, build a wider one. If a tiger can escape a cage, guess what??? Your cage ain’t working.
Unless these boys jumped the fence and crossed into the tiger’s domain, the responsiblity of not letting the tiger out of the cage lies squarely on the shoulders of the zoo authorities. And they dropped the proverbial ball here.

I do have an alcoholic/drug user in my family and yes, we would be very happy is something were to happen to him. Why? Because he has threatened to kill each one of us at some point, had guns hidden in his room and yet, due to the laws, the police could not keep him nor could that state hospital. So, until you’ve actually had to deal with the realities of what it’s like to have abusers in your family, don’t speak about everyone makes mistakes. They don’t change. They don’t care. If death is the only way to protect others, then so be it. I’m all for the death penalty for drunk drivers who hurt or kill others or those driving under the influence of drugs who do the same.

And to say that it is the zoo’s fault is like saying that it’s okay for us to all act irresponsibily as long as we can blame someone else. It’s okay to have no thought or consideration for others, animals, humans or otherwise, as long as we dont’ have to take responsibility.

Again, I point out - in their 50+ years, the zoo has never had a tiger do this. So what does that say about what the kids were doing? And yes, it could have just as easily been adults. As I recall, they did find rocks and branches in the moat. If someone were throwing things at me I’d do something as would most of you, I’m sure.

Like I said, if they had been just normal visitors to the zoo that would have been one thing but somehow this nation has turned into a nation of do what you want, who cares about others and if something happens, blame everyone but yourself.

Based on the fact that the 17 yr. olds father stated he ‘hoped his son wouldn’t so something like that’ in reference to teasing the animals - that certainly suggests his son had been in trouble before.

And there’s no point to anything more being said. Obviously we are going to disagree on this. I’m not one of those ‘animals are always right and people are always wrong’ people but, again, I’m sick of people allowing others to hide behind the excuse of they were young, they were drunk and/or they were high and that makes it all okay and not their fault at all. They are the only ones responsible here.

I do have an alcoholic/drug user in my family and yes, we would be very happy is something were to happen to him.

That’s your personal perspective.

As I recall, they did find rocks and branches in the moat.

Can anyone prove those rocks/branches got in the cage on December 25th? You are making a huge assumption here.

that certainly suggests his son had been in trouble before.

There we go. Yet another assumption.

Again, I point out - in their 50+ years, the zoo has never had a tiger do this.

I’m not sure if that was their first or not, but it certainly wasn’t their last.
http://www.kcba.com/news/local.....86ec1f7fb7

They are the only ones responsible here.

Nope you’re wrong there. No one’s blaming the animals, animals will be animals. If someone else got drunk and taunted a tiger and it escaped and attacked you, how would you feel? When I go to a zoo, irrespective of whether I’m drunk or sober or good or bad, confining the animals to their enclosures is the zoo’s responsiblity. They failed miserably.

Again, I point out - in their 50+ years, the zoo has never had a tiger do this

Actually the same tiger was involved in an *unprovoked* attack a year before this incident. Read this

I am truly sorry for the situation in your family but Santosh is absolutely right. Don’t make assumptions!

I’d expected this as soon as they hired Geragos. Johnny Cochran, may he RIP, would be proud. I see a retirement making settlement in the offing, helped by the press’ generous tarring and feathering of the Dhaliwals, allowing them to claim mental agony in addition to the obvious physical danger they faced. Christmas is indeed the gift that could keep on giving for them.

Actually the same tiger was involved in an *unprovoked* attack a year before this incident. Read this

And the zoo was declared fully at fault in that situation. As they should be in this one, unless there is evidence that the Dhaliwals entered the enclosure.

I don’t know why the tiger’s attack a year ago is relevant. It is not as if this tiger behaved in a manner that is out of character for tigers.

don’t know why the tiger’s attack a year ago is relevant

Rahul,
I was responding to sick of them’s specific assertion that the zoo *never* had a problem with the Tiger till the Dhaliwal’s and Carlos’ visit - not true!

The zoo never did have a problem with Tatiana– except for the one they were at fault for. For all this talk of not making assumptions, plenty are being made by this blog. Tatiana bit her handler because the area where she was fed was improperly designed. A state board later found that the zoo was to blame for that as well as a lack of training. Animal experts have gone on record to state that if ANYONE had done what the handler did, with ANY tiger, the same thing would have probably occurred. That does not indicate a “problem” or any kind of precedence for “rogue tiger” behavior.

Rahul was right. Tatiana’s previous “attack” is irrelevant, unless you want to forget that tigers are wild animals who do what is in their nature. They did NOT have a problem with Tatiana, who was extra defensive around feeding time, about her “prey”.

As for Santosh’s less-than-even-handed condemnation of the zoo and only the zoo…I have two threads on SM which delve in to that, I won’t repeat everything here. It’s not that simple, but to leave it at that is probably best if you’re interested in a quick-and-dirty, one paragraph post.

The zoo is at fault, of course, but that wall passed inspections, year after year. That tiger was shouted at for years by thousands of children. How surprising that the one time there is blood on the sign INSIDE the wall, the tiger got out…but hey, we should be able to act like utter jack-asses at the zoo, and rely on the zoo vs our own common sense, right?

Sick of them, I understand everything you were trying to say. I am sorry for what you’ve gone through wrt your family member and I agree with your disgust for the Dhaliwals behavior. I, too, am sick of the world having to be padded and reinforced for gutless, selfish imbeciles who can’t control themselves and who ruin everything for everyone else while they careen through life, fucking up everything (endangered species, too) in their path.

Anna,
Do you also agree with ’sick of them’ that Carlos deserved to die? That the Dhaliwal’s should have died too? Sure, they behaved foolishly. But the zoo cannot be exonerated either.

Animals attack. People behave foolishly. If the Zoo remembered these 2 facts while designing the enclosure , the outcome on Christmas Day at SF zoo would have been different. As far as I can see,no one on ‘this blog’ is either:
a) giving the Dhaliwal’s a free pass OR
b) Blaming the tiger

Carlos paid the ultimate price by dying at the age of seventeen. Now whether this is because of his and his friends’ behavior or the zoo’s negligence or as is most likely - a combination of both - its still very unfortunate and I cannot imagine gloating over his death.

Rahul,
I was responding to sick of them’s specific assertion that the zoo *never* had a problem with the Tiger till the Dhaliwal’s and Carlos’ visit - not true!

Runa, if somebody brought up the Dhaliwal’s general belligerent nature, the fact that they were known troublemakers even outside this context (not to mention the fact that they were drunk, high and were being given a wide berth by other zoo goers because they were provoking the tiger that evening), I am sure you would point out that their previous history of belligerence should have nothing to do with how this event is judged, right? Why is Tatiana’s previous behavioral history relevant, more so when a detailed investigation has shown that she was not at fault, in the least?

The entire story is sordid in the Dhaliwal’s behavior, the likelihood of their profiting from it, and the death of a 17 year old from the zoo’s negligence, both in tamping down on the behavior of these miscreants, and in making sure their tiger was restrained.

Why is Tatiana’s previous behavioral history relevant, more so when a detailed investigation has shown that she was not at fault, in the least?

Rahul,
I am going to say this for the last time :I do NOT blame Tatiana. I am using exactly the same logic - that past behavior is not relevant - and applying it to the irrelevant and factually incorrect statement that “- in their 50+ years, the zoo has never had a tiger do this”.

I have no disagreement with your last comment.