New Evidence Suggests SF Zoo Tiger Provoked
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5 / KCBS) ― There is more evidence that suggests a tiger at the San Francisco Zoo may have been provoked before it escaped its enclosure and attacked three people, killing a San Jose teenager and injuring his two friends on Christmas Day, according to KCBS Radio.
A source involved in the investigation told KCBS a significant amount of blood was found on an exhibit sign inside the tiger enclosure, a foot and a half from the public railing. The blood on the sign indicates someone may have climbed the railing and was attacked while standing in the planted area between the moat and the railing.
The KCBS source says a footprint found on top of the three-foot high railing was located on a portion of the railing across from the sign.
Zoo spokesman Sam Singer confirms the KCBS report. He says blood was also found on some foliage within the tiger enclosure near the sign.
Singer says he does not know if the blood has been tested or who it came from. Police won’t comment on the blood or footprint evidence.
Attorneys for Khulbir and Paul Dhaliwal, the 2 brothers who survived the attack, deny they entered the enclosure or provoked or taunted the tiger. Their friend, 17-year-old Carlos Souza, was killed by the tiger.
Souza’s mother says one of the brothers told her they were walking and talking outside the exhibit when the tiger jumped out and attacked them.
(© MMVIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)
I knew it! I just knew it! I knew Tatiana had to be provoked! How else do you explain the blood? How else do you explain the footprint on the railing (that’s 3 foot high, I might add)?
What about the EMT in the ambulance who heard the brothers make a pact not to cooperate with police and other officials? What about the moral character of the brothers, now that there are charges against one of them for battery against a police officer?
All of this sounds so fishy to me! It looks to me like the brothers, being little boys, acted like dummies and thought they could have a little fun by climbing the railing of the enclosure and taunting the tiger and tossing stuff in the enclosure (or whatnot — not sure about this part). Then, when the tiger, Tatiana, who seemed a lot smarter than the average big cat, decided to jump and attack them (out of sheer frustration or anger or irritation), it’s all the SF zoo’s fault for having an enclosure that is not up to standards.
This sounds vaguely familiar. Doesn’t it sound like those Stella Award lawsuits where a burglar falls down the stairs of a house he’s just robbed and he sues the owner for negligence?
I think Tatiana was smarter than all three of those punks put together.
I think a jury will decide that the punks share in the liability; i.e., that Tatiana would never have gotten out in the first place, if not for their tormenting her.