Tiger Attack Victims Hire High Profile Lawyer

Newsroom ^ | 1/1/08

[Mr. Brightside]

Tiger Attack Victims Hire High Profile Lawyer

Tuesday, Jan 1, 2008 @06:21pm CST

Two brothers who were injured by a tiger during a Christmas Day attack at the San Francisco Zoo have hired a high-profile lawyer.

The victims will be represented by defense attorney Mark Geragos whose previous clients have included Michael Jackson and actress Winona Ryder.

ABC News reports Geragos is expected to file suit against the zoo on behalf of Paul and Kulbir Dhaliwal. A friend, Carlos Sousa Jr., was killed in the same attack.

According to ABCNews.com, Geragos says of the attacks, quote,"there are some very disturbing facts yet to come about, about what happened."

He also cites revelations that the wall around the enclosure for the 350-lb tiger was nearly four-feet below industry recommendations.

In addition, Geragos called reports that the group had taunted the tiger ahead of the attack as "an urban legend."

The tiger was shot to death by police.

[Rte66]

Oh, I know Geragos is going to attack the zoo for the employees doing that - and thinking it was all a joke. When nothing like this had ever happened, it’s understandable, even if despicable in 20-20 hindsight.

I didn’t get the picture that Tatiana was sitting “over” the boy - it was said that they were sitting side-by-side. Maybe that was bad reporting, I don’t know.

(Yes, I’ve had cats, too.)

[Rte66]

Thanks, I can’t watch videos on this computer. What is it about?

[Mr. Brightside]

I guess it is possible that a person opened, and closed, the door. But the police and zoo officials have ruled it out as a possibility.

Also, the cat had concrete imbedded in it’s back paws, leading them to believe that the tiger used its back paws to scratch its way up the wall after she made it to the top with her front paws.

[Rte66]

Oh, OK - I thought there was another wall going up the “visitor” side of the moat, making it higher from the bottom to the top.

I guess that’s the ledge that Jack Hanna said Tatiana possibly grabbed onto to get up and over. Thanks.

[Rte66]

Yeah, I remember that about the concrete in the back paws, but wasn’t sure if that was what the wall was made of, or if it was rock.

[Mr. Brightside]

I do feel for the zoo. I have employees in the same catagory as those working in the concession stand that turned away one of the victims. And no matter what you do, how you train them, they will do what they want. I can sympathize with that.

But the zoo officials who ignored reports safety problems, who could not find a tranquilizer gun and who kept the police outside while they ‘handled’ the situation themselves are the ones who deserve the blame.

[Rte66]

This was an extraordinary situation, one that has never happened at any other zoo - so I’m not sure I would say they are “to blame” for the boys’ injuries and death.

I’m looking forward to hearing the whole story if the lawsuits are filed and people are under oath.

[spunkets]

Re: "there are some very disturbing facts yet to come about, about what happened"

"Yeah.....WHAT HAPPENED?"

Don't know all of it. There's a time line.
5:08 911 call zoo doubts story, but says man is bleeding from back of neck.
5:10 Zoo announces tiger(s) missing
5:12 Fire, police, paramedics reach zoo.
5:13 paramedics refuse to enter until it's safe
5:17 zoo announces it has tiger in sight.
5:18 cops and paramedics go in.
5:20 paramedics and cops find Carlos and are treating him.
5:27 tiger shot.

The disturbing facts the lawyer's going to spring will be sensational obfuscations regarding the chaos that ensued following the taunting of the tiger. The brothers had a cell phone on them and never called 911. I don't see how they could be in the office with some zoo officials at 5:08, that thought they were crazy and noted one of them was bleeding, then get attacked 20mins later by the tiger when they were all alone. I think they must have been less than cooperative then also.

"The whole story is yet to come out and I have a feeling it's regarding these punks and their role in all this."

Yes, that will be when the police release the results of their investigation. There's been enough released to show this never would have happened, had they not tormented the tiger. The Oakland zoo had a pit that was 13', 6" less than this pit and never had a problem also.

[spunkets]

"6" less than this pit"

6" more than...

[spunkets]

"We probably should not post to each other any more."

LOL! I see.

Oh, what's this, another post?

"...you must be the dumbest poster I have ever seen here. So long."

LOL!

[elli1]

Yet the big cats' exhibit was not a problem cited in a 1999 performance audit report of the zoo by the city's budget analyst's office that was conducted by Dr. Joel Parrott, who is now executive director of the Oakland Zoo.

While Parrott said several animal exhibits were out of date, including the bear and elephant habitats, he did not find any fundamental structural problems with the Lion House, only noting that "although the Lion House is a public sentimental favorite, it is clearly dated in concept and design."

Parrott, who stressed Monday that the zoo is under different management now than it was at the time of his report, said nothing in the Lion House caught his eye when he toured the facility in 1999.

He said that at the time he was consumed with concerns about the elephants and bears. Two of the zoo's elephants were sent away to sanctuaries after two others died at the zoo in the past few years. A new bear exhibit opened last year with help from the William Randolph Hearst Foundation (the Hearst Corp. owns The Chronicle), but other bears remain in dismal-looking exhibits.

"There weren't complaints about the tigers, and I have seen other zoos with comparable space issues, and I certainly didn't stop to look at the wall height," Parrott said.

He said that while much of the attention around how the tiger escaped has been focused on the height of the walls surrounding the moat, the design of the exhibit may be a more important factor. The exhibit has a small stretch of vegetation between the visitor side of moat and a waist-high wall, which could have allowed the tiger to land somewhere when she either jumped the moat or scaled its walls. It might have been harder for her to get out without that.

"It's not just about the height, it's also what's at the top of that wall," Parrott said. "In this case, there's a ledge, and if it was a matter of height alone maybe the tiger would have had to return to the exhibit."

Source

Joel Parrott is the current director of the Oakland Zoo. He's currently dealing with plans to increase the height of the (below industry standard) walls at the Oakland Zoo tiger exhibit.

[elli1]

Maybe I am reading it wrong but Gergos seems to be implying that the other brother DID deserve to be attacked.

Not at all. From the link in Post #29:

"There are some very disturbing facts yet to come out about what happened," Geragos told ABCNews.com. "One of the brothers had absolutely no reason to be attacked. After Carlos was attacked, this brother ran to the zoo café and they would not let him in. The same guys who sold him nachos wouldn't let him back in. They locked the doors. Thirty minutes later, he was attacked by the tiger."

An employee barricaded in the zoo's Terrace Café reportedly made the first 911 calls, saying that one of the brothers was screaming outside. According to police logs obtained by the San Francisco Chronicle, officers were initially skeptical of claims of an attack: "Zoo personnel dispatch now say there are two males whom the zoo thinks are 800 [mentally unstable] and making something up. But one is in fact bleeding from the back of the head."

[Mr. Brightside]

San Francisco Zoo officials are defending their operation, saying industry inspectors who reviewed the zoo's practices and facilities three years ago never cited concerns about the tiger pen. But they also have acknowledged that their own records overstated the height of its walls by 5 feet.

Ron Tilson, who oversees tiger management for the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, was baffled why neither his group's inspectors nor the zoo would notice such a deficiency. With a wall only 12 1/2 feet high, he said "the tiger can almost stand up and reach it" and would have little difficulty escaping "with a little bit of a hop."

But as Tilson notes, the AZA's enclosure guidelines "have never been compulsory."

"In no way do I have the power to implement them or demand that they be met," Tilson said.

In California, state law also governs the keeping of wild animals. However, the state exempts from its oversight zoos accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums.

Critics say the system still falls short.

"The issue here is that it's essentially industry self-regulation," said Wayne Pacelle. "

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_7842811?nclick_check=1

The zoo industry has been inspecting itself for years, as your post points out. The SF zoo overstated the height of the wall by 5 feet, and the inspectors never noticed or cared. Both the zoo and the association are to blame on this one.

[Mrs. Frogjerk]

They should build enclosures that will keep the animals inside so that the stupid humans can taunt them and still be safe.

I don’t doubt that the zoo may have been responsible somewhat, but if those twits were going after the tiger and generally ticking it off, than they are responsible for the bulk of what happened.

[CholeraJoe]

Winona - convicted; Peterson - convicted; Jackson - acquitted but disgraced. Has Geragos won a case lately?

[Wolfie]

If I was on the jury, I wouldn’t give them a single cent.

[Hacksaw]

If I was on the jury, I wouldn’t give them a single cent.

Neither would I.

[ThomasThomas]

Where would you want this case to be tried? If it is held in San Francisco who would win? They might try to make the tiger the victim. I have read many post trying to use law and common sense to make their case. This is the city of the Twinkie defense. We can try to understand what is happen but with a cast of, San Francisco, zoo, peta might have something to say, high profile lawyers, foreign born plaintiffs and the outside change of Cindy Shehand claiming it was Bush's fault because we spent the money or Iraq instead of Zoos, no true poster here is crazy enough to start to understand what might happen with this case. This a city where feeling good trumps facts and hyperbole is tomorrows goal.

[frogjerk]

Geragos - Can turn a misdemeanor into a felony in no time!

[spunkets]

"Joel Parrott is the current director of the Oakland Zoo. He's currently dealing with plans to increase the height of the (below industry standard) walls at the Oakland Zoo tiger exhibit.

That's wonderful. The walls however, plus the animal treatment were adequate to contain the animal for 67 years. The Oakland zoo had a roughly equivalent pit depth, and no incident occurred there over all the years of it's existence. This incident is all I'm concerned about, and it was caused by the punks taunting the tiger with slingshots, at the end of the day, when the rest of the park patron's were gone for zoo closing. It was not caused by pit depth.

Discussion of the wall height for a higher level of containment, one that would contain cats tormented with the equivalent of whips, cattle prods and slingshots is another matter.

""One of the brothers had absolutely no reason to be attacked. After Carlos was attacked, this brother ran to the zoo café and they would not let him in. The same guys who sold him nachos wouldn't let him back in. They locked the doors. Thirty minutes later, he was attacked by the tiger."

That's funny. At 5:08, after the bros had failed to call 911 on their own cell phone, the bros were both in some room with park officials per 911 call by those same park guys. The officals determined the tiger was missing at 8:10 and locked the place down. Considering the fact that the 2 had been up to no good and were out on bail for doing the same to humans, and resisting arrest with violence, I think the punk was being less than cooperative and left on his own. The park was closed and under lock down, so that no one entered. Park officials were causing folks to leave. The 2nd bro was out on his own, because he failed to obey park official commands. The concession stand was closed and maybe under notice of lock down. The Police and park officials had already emptied the park, but this guy was still running around loose in it on his own. I think the already closed for the day concession stand operator saw that agitated stranger as posing a risk. Also, that second attack was 19 mins later, not 30 mins later.

If that punk was so afraid of the tiger he caused to jump loose, he should have stayed put with the park officials in the first place. Notice how the tiger didn't go after anyone else, only the members of the group that taunted and provoked her with the slingshots.