Only she is interviewed, by either the Chronicle or the police. Neither you nor I know anything more of what happened later, so your ad hominem can be allowed to fly into the ether. The zoo's job is to keep the tiger in the zoo, and that's the basic fact here.
Oh please. Did we require interviews from every person at the WTC on 9/11 to prove it happened? This lady was there with her husband and two kids. She said her kids were disturbed by the thugs’ behavior. Sorry this doesn’t fit in with “the zoo is completely at fault” frame of mind. I do think the zoo could have protected both the humans and the animals better, but these thugs found out the hard way that actions have consequences. Too bad about the tiger, though, who was just being a tiger and didn’t ask to be taunted.
That was not an ad hominem.
If you beleiev it was, you need a better dictionary.