Posted on 01/17/2008 7:08:12 PM PST by yorkie
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.
Paul Dhaliwal, 19, denied throwing anything into the enclosure or otherwise antagonizing the animal, according to an account contained in police investigators' request for a search warrant in connection with the Christmas Day attack that killed Carlos Sousa Jr. of San Jose.
Police armed with the warrant and seeking evidence that the men had taunted the tiger searched the 2002 BMW belonging to Dhaliwal's 23-year-old brother, Kulbir, on Wednesday. They also reviewed the brothers' cell phones for any photos they might have taken before the tiger attacked.
Police said they had recovered messages and images, but apparently nothing incriminating in connection with the tiger attack. Investigators seized a small amount of marijuana as well as a partially filled bottle of Grey Goose vodka from the car, according to the inventory that police submitted from the search.
They also found a kit commonly used to defeat drug testing, which included a vial of unisex synthetic urine, police said. Paul Dhaliwal was on probation stemming from a drunken driving incident and crash that occurred before the attack.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I think you are right.
I am amazed how quickly zoo officials were able to blame the victims and how many people fell for it.
Imagine a semi-truck jumping the curb and the president of the company immediately blaming the victims who were run over.
What would it matter if the victims were drunk at the time? And would the driver be exhonorated if it was found that the victims had been yelling at the driver and waiving their arms?
no other people were killed by their negligence.
Blood Found Inside Tiger Enclosure
"police took the sign - which lists facts about Siberian tigers - after they discovered on Dec. 27 that it was smeared with blood."
It was another poster here that claimed I was ‘making things up.’
As I re-read, I see it wasn’t you. If my posts seemed a little defensive, it was not directed at you.
You have been pretty reasonable on this topic.
Regards,
Stay tuned.
Should be interesting.
Is the zoo’s theory that one of the victims was mauled inside the enclosure at the top of the wall?
(And keep in mind, this “smeared” statement is from the zoo’s spokeman Sam Singer, who was a Democratic spinmeister and is a credible as Geragos himself. Did the police say it was “smeared” or was that Singer’s word?)
Seeing a big, tall man standing on the railing (as opposed to someone holding a little child up to see better) would signal to me, if I were inside the enclosure, “uh-oh, someone’s coming in!”
That’s definitely threatening enough to provoke an aggressive response - and a result that had never been provoked before in 67 years there, and never anywhere else at any zoo in the U.S.
Thank you.
I don't know what the "zoo's theory" is, but blood was found on a sign and was taken as evidence by police. Like I said, stay tuned.
You have posted your opinions which co-insides with what Geragos has stated and I have with Singer. Neither are 100 percent correct but there is "some" truth to both sides.
Police say the taunting "contributed" to the attack.
Geragos vs. Singer
Almost as hard as the choice between so-called “frontrunners” Huckabee/McCain/Romney/Giuliani.
: )
Totally agree with you on that!
But standing on the railing? Paul's BAL was .16.
And for the record, I DON’T post statements from Geragos as fact.
I post public statements by investigators, assuming those are true.
Unnamed police sources, like with the the “slingshot” story, have proven unreliable.
As I stated, I cannot imagine why they were not arrested for public intoxication and drug charges.
Stay tuned, it's not over.
The police have already stated that the brothers will not be charged.
The only reason I can think of that they are not facing alcohol or drug charges is because of a pending civil suit against the city by the brothers. The San Francisco police and the San Francisco Zoo receive funding from the same municipality.
The police have already stated that the case remained “inactive” and look how that turned out.
They did nothing of the sort.
Employees and visitors had warned zoo officials for many years about tigers jumping this moat and nearly getting out of this enclosure.
Why did they have to wait until someone died to bring the wall up to standards?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.