Plus all had previous contacts with the police. Plus they drove 50 miles on Christmas to visit the zoo. Did they get what they deserved?
If they provoked that poor animal, they deserve everything they got.
How to make $5 Million easy. Go to zoo. Get drunk, attack wild animals with a slingshot. Sue Zoo for $$$ when the tormented animal tries to escape.
Don’t take a slingshot to a tiger fight. This event is a disaster all the way around. 2 mauled guys, a death, the destruction of a rare tiger, and financial mess for the zoo and city. Lots of heads will role on this one.
NY Post material must be excerpted in all circumstances. Please make a note of it.
And the tiger rightly removed them from the gene pool. Taunting a tiger is a special kind of stupid.
Hold muh Vodka....
The police shot the wrong animal.
“Amritpal Dhaliwal, 19, and his brother, Kulbir, 23’
Sikhs, and from a very much honored clan of warriors in India. Not good at all!
SLINGSHOTS
Happy New Year, San Francisco Zoo
When I was a little girl, a friendly keeper at the San Francisco Zoo invited me into a cage and let me hold a koala bear. It was a thrilling moment. And one not likely to be repeated in today's climate of institutional fear over "deep-pocket" lawsuits.
Because the topic of my doctoral research and subsequent publications was public exhibitions of masculinity among young male humans, my antenna went up on Christmas when I heard about the tiger attack at the S.F. Zoo.
What caught my interest was the initial news report that the tiger attacked three young men who had been lingering by the tiger's cage after the zoo had closed - possibly ignoring other potential victims.
Another detail increased my professional interest. The two surviving victims, brothers age 23 and 19, were hostile and uncooperative with police. Think about it: If you were stalked and mauled by a rampaging tiger, why would you try to mislead and obstruct investigators?
A third revelation of note was that these brothers, Kulbir and Amritpal Dhaliwal, were awaiting trial for a recent display of alleged drunken aggression. In that Oct. 9 incident, police caught the brothers chasing two men; after their arrest they allegedly cursed police and kicked the police car's security partition. They are scheduled to appear in court in a couple of weeks on misdemeanor charges of public intoxication and resisting arrest.
Interestingly, it was the older of these belligerent brothers that Tatiana the tiger first attacked; the unfortunate Carlos Sousa Jr. was apparently killed when he intervened to save his friend.
While speculation persists about the victims' potential contribution to the attack, the media are focusing more on the height of the wall outside of the tiger grotto's moat. Is it built to the height of the recommended standards of the 21st century? Of course not. It is 67 years old. And in all those years, not one tiger has escaped. Indeed, experts say that around the world thousands of tigers are kept in enclosures of roughly the same height, and they don't escape.
As one wildlife expert commented, the ultimate explanation for Tatiana's attack is not the height of the wall, but the "stimulus" she was reacting to. "Tigers around the world are perfectly safe behind 10-foot or 12-foot walls," said Martine Colette, founder of a wildlife refuge in Southern California. "There had to have been a tremendous stimulus that made the tiger react the way she did."
If indeed the tiger was provoked, as some suspect, this would conform with a typical display of masculine aggression. These displays - which often take the form of sexual aggression or antigay harassment - serve the functions of proving masculinity, social bonding, and the celebration of male power. In these forms of participatory theater, the targets - whether they be women, gay men, or even, as in this case, a tiger - serve as interchangeable dramatic props. (See my article on this topic.)
While no avenue of investigation should be ignored, I hope the media and investigators will focus as much attention on the likely provocation as in Monday morning quarterbacking of the zoo's response. As a struggling public institution whose aim is to educate the public about wildlife conservation and endangered species, the S.F. Zoo can ill afford a deep-pocket verdict based on misplaced castigation.
Now we know why they wouldn’t cooperate with police. They should be held accountable.
Are they going to pull the “diversity” card out and flash it in our faces?
JIHADI regulars set out to cause some terror maybe...
Last words watch this.
NOW it makes sense that they were TAUNTING...not with words but THINGS!
I believe in Yellowstone some years ago a black bear took a New Jersey tourist out of the gene pool. The bear was saved though since plenty of eyewitnesses had the deceased idiot provoking the bear so he could get a better picture. Both sides will want to settle out of court.
I remember a similar story about the Prospect Park Zoo in Brooklyn (iirc) about twenty years ago.
Seems some yutes gained access to the zoo at night by scaling a fence. They got in the habit of taunting a tiger and eventually climbed a tree and went out on a limb overhanging the tiger’s cage. The tiger crouched defensively, never showing any aggression ... until, emboldend by the tigers passivity one of them went out too far on the limb and came within the tiger’s reach. Perhaps a man’s reach should exceed his grasp, but in this case the tiger’s did not.
With one mighty bound the tiger grabbed the yute in front of his horrified friends and pulled him into his cage. Needless to say this story had a happy ending. The decision was made not to destroy the tiger and he lived out his years with the happy memories of one who laughs last.