Posted on 01/03/2008 6:12:02 AM PST by Red in Blue PA
SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) -- Police are investigating whether several items found in the enclosure of a tiger who fatally mauled a 17-year-old man show that the animal was attacked or taunted, San Francisco Zoo spokesman Sam Singer said Wednesday.
Police are examining a large rock, a tree branch and other items, Singer said.
"They [police] are trying to make a determination that those items or any other things that happened on Christmas Day were part of some attack on the tiger or something that angered Tatiana, causing her to come out of her cage," the spokesman said.
San Francisco Police Chief Heather Fong has said that a shoe print found on the railing at the tiger enclosure is being examined to determine if one of the victims climbed over the rail or threw their leg over the side.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I am not so sure about the tiger being able to just leap out of its enclosure. I think it may have had some help if you know what I mean, even if by accident via stupidity. I don’t see anybody admitting to anything any time soon considering a person was killed.
I don’t know, I smell something extremely fishy here!
Is it just me?
Whoops. Forgot a sarcasm tag. :-)
The tiger was probably really pissed off at the three of them. One has to ask why?
Ridiculous! So it is OK for the tiger to get out if someone makes it angry? If the tiger had killed your child or grandchild after it had finished with the young men, I guess that would be OK, since there was "nothing wrong with the enclosure."
Look, I'm not defending these young men. I don't know enough about what really happened to do that. Maybe they were buttheads. They probably were buttheads.. It doesn't matter. If the tiger got out, then, by definition, there is something wrong with the enclosure.
Think like the tiger. It wasn't prey but a challenger.
The two survivors have good reason to not give public interviews.
Many other people still present in the zoo at the time of the attack also have good reason to keep their mouths shut ~ while their lawyers prepare their own lawsuits.
Yes, everyone there was THREATENED by a loose tiger! They will all be after compensation.
My point is that adequacy is judged by the results, whereas being substandard is judged according to comparison to a given standard or guideline. If the guideline/standard are inadequate, then a standard pen would be inadequate.
Consider that if a substandard ruler is only 11 inches long, it would still be adequate for measuring ten inch lengths, although it would be inadequate for measuring foot-long lengths.
This pen was clearly inadequate, barring discovery of some mitigating condition that compromised the barrior due to circumstances beyond the zoo’s control.
I’m just not certain it was substandard, given that the guidelines may have been met when the pen was originally constructed.
I’m just differentiating the ideas of conformance to standards and ability to properly perform the task. (Can you tell I work in regulatory compliance for the aerospace industry??? ;-)
Exactly. And, seeing as how this particular tiger had already mauled its caretaker a year earlier, almost to the day, better precautions should have been taken. It doesn't appear it was, by any means, any kind of "docile" wild animal. And that appears an oxymoron, at the very least.
Answered your own question and got the correct answer. You are doing well.
There is a little problem with that, as well as the rest of the BS, the animals rights crowd is throwing around.
"On Thursday, Fong denied earlier reports that police were looking into the possibility that the victims had dangled a leg or other body part over the edge of the moat, after a shoe and blood was found inside the enclosure. No shoe was found inside, but a shoeprint was found on the railing of the fence surrounding the enclosure, and police are checking it against the shoes of the three victims, she said."
FROM: http://209.85.207.104/search?q=cache:g8F8cXHcxzQJ:www.breitbart.com/article.php%3Fid%3DD8TQHJKG0%26show_article%3D1+tiger,+cops+no+shoe+was+found&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&lr=lang_en
How often do the tigers take walks around the grounds at night?
Don't know, but I know a teacher out there emailed him to see if he could get me a license and tiger stamp. "Nice Coat."
You know, at first I was suspicious of the two survivors’ unwillingness to talk to anyone.
But then I see what stories people (here and elsewhere) are willing to build out of scraps of facts, half-facts, and outright non-facts. Like the slingshot thing, “reported” in one paper and then widely discussed, so that people hear something about it on Fox and think it must be have been verified. Like speculation that they’re Muslims, even though they have clearly Indian names, not that it would matter anyway. Like the insistence that no tiger ever jumped out of that enclosure before, even though more witnesses have attested to that than have claimed to see any taunting.
And I watch the zoo officials continue to drop vague hints that “something must have provoked” the tiger to jump out, even though they have no basis for any such claim.
And I start to think the guys were d*mn smart to STFU until they talked to a lawyer.
Taunting does not matter. Sling shots do not matter. If the three men gave the tiger a wedgie and insulted the tigers mother it would not matter. The tiger escaped. That matters. He killed one man. That matters. The presumption to the general public is that the tiger can’t get out, even if its insulted.
Hanna wants to say that its strange that someone would go to the zoo on Christmas. Well then its strange that the zoo is open on Christmas.
The bottom line is that the zoo knows it has a dangerous animal. They are animal experts. They are expected to provide a safe environment. Taunting a Tiger is a bad idea. Its inhumane. Its morally wrong. But with all that, the fault goes with the zoo which did not provide safety. If the men jumped into the exhibit and were eaten, I would be on the zoos side because the men knew the zone of safety and they crossed it. Thats not what happened here. Zoos fault.
The tiger did not decide to stay in its cage until someone really pissed it off. It may have been provoked to try a really hard jump to get out. But still it could get out. Even when the zoo promised safety. The zoo is at fault here.
If for no reason other than the safety of the tiger itself. The tiger should have been kept in a secure enclosure. Now the tiger is dead. The zoos job was to ensure the safety of the people and the tiger.
True
Your ignorance is overwhelming. Police chiefs of large agencies do not make arrests for murder or anything else. Police chiefs of most agencies are APPOINTED by the mayor, county exec, governor. They serve at the pleasure of that appointing authority, and are usually political whores. They toe the prevailing party line because if they don’t they get canned. If you don’t think that the liberal mayor/council of San Francisco didn’t appoint this individual based a great deal, if not entirely, on her sex and race then you are the biggest fool on this site. I won’t even get into the affirmative action hiring quotas practiced by most police and fire agencies.
Stating a fact isn’t racist, it’s a fact.
Take your ignorant, sanctimonious, rino, gutless attitude and put it where the sun doesn’t shine.
Thanks. I’m glad you can see the humor in it.
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.