"Get the widow on the set. we need dirty..."
 

Tiger escapes (or is turned loose?) and kills boy in zoo.

Parents on Today show.
We ARE SOOOOOOO sorry for your loss but now, tell us ...How do you FEEL?
Tell us about your (dead) son. Hobbies? Student? Was he a happy boy? What kind of running shoes did he like to wear? Favorite foods? Who's to blame here?

Oh sorry, didn't mean to make you cry on National TV!

(Ok, I jest somewhat, but...)

What type of individual(s) agree to go on national news after such a traumatic family experience? WHY would you submit yourself to, what will undoubtedly be, inane questions?

My/our 15 minutes of fame????

I was thinking the same thing. Why do victims/breaved relatives feel the need to be on tv? Are we all that desparate for that 15 minutes?

Money. They plan to profit big time from the attack and this is the first step to build a huge lawsuit. The more publicity, the bigger the settlement.

Sad to say, but the only reason I can think of is "what can I get out of this for me?". That seems to be the new way to get rich quick - suffer a loss and then suck people into feeling sorry and making a profit from their sorrow. I imagine any law firm would love to get as much press for their client and this may be another reason. Bad press would make the zoo very open to negotiate a quick and quiet settlement. I truely hope I'm wrong but it does seem to be a trend.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with the money angle. The lawyers were probably knocking on the family's front door seconds after the story hit the wires.....a few million will certainly help to dry those tears, won't it?. It's the lawyers who set up and negotiate the fees for those TV appearances...the more public sympathy, the better. The local news out here is reporting very few details about just how that tiger managed to escape from it's enclosure. The SF Zoo is keeping quiet and preparing it's defense against what will surely be a massive lawsuit. Some stories about the kids taunting the tiger, or that they may have climbed over a protective fence are starting to circulate...could be true, or just a ruse by the Zoo to bolster it's defense.


"I was thinking the same thing. Why do victims/breaved relatives feel the need to be on tv? Are we all that desparate for that 15 minutes?" - Kurt V

This has always puzzled me, too. It's like the people who go on Dr. Phil, Judge Judy, or similar shows to be humiliated on national TV. What's going on here....is it more than just the money?

Sickening behavior all around .
Except from the tiger who was just being a tiger - that was tragic.

"Besides that, Ms. Lincoln...What did you think of the play?"

I just read this morning of new information that's coming out about the attack. Seems as though the "kids" were taunting the tigers earlier, that they were in the zoo after closing, and that they may have placed a board across the moat that keeps the tigers in their area. I guess they thought it would be funny for the tigers to roam around the zoo on their own.

this was really sad

Wow, now the family can sue the zoo and the city for lax security, letting them stay after closing. Plus they should have never left a board laying around that could be miss-used, that's blatent negligence! Could be worth an extra couple of mil.

Maybe the guardian/parents could be held liable for the zoo's legal costs associated with their children's actions, and the replacement costs of the tiger.

Did someone notify child services about negligence?

Were there signs posted telling you to charge the cat, rather than running away? Once you run, you're dinner. Takes some balls not to flinch, but they say it works. Anyway, natural selection is alive and well.

I agree, the punks were teasing the tiger, made it so he could get out and became dinner, fuch em, I hope the zoo sues them and wins!!!! What is that old saying Don't Grab a Tiger by the Tail??

They shouldn't have shot the tiger either, but fed him the punk's parents:mad:

Sorry situation, but the Tiger had to die.

That would never happen on my watch, and no matter what the parents get, they will never have their son back. Stupid kids, but where did they get a plank ?

Too much is screwed up here. Ultimately the zoo has to be responsible for zoo safety and security. The rest is just stupidity.

It's more immediate than that. Guests are paid outright (pretty big bucks) just for being on the show.

If they had been better parents that wouldn't be a problem, but the kids didn't know right from wrong, and who was responsible to teach them???

What if the tiger they let loose had killed someone elses kids?? Wouldn't these POS parents be responsible for that, I say yes, and they should be charged!!!:mad:

At least the Apes and Monkeys can defend themselves from taunting by throwing crap back at the taunters.....or as the French say, I will phart in yer general direction.....

Going on TV after a tragic family event seems to be standard practice with certain minorities. OK, I said it. Call me a racist but it is the way I see it. (but you all were thinking the same thing)

QUOTE:"Going on TV after a tragic family event seems to be standard practice with certain minorities"
_________________

OMG. Where the Fuch did THAT come from? Minorities????

I think the entire social spectrum has been represented, at one time or another, in these situations!

What about the Tiger´s grieving family? Kids? Havn´t seen them crying on national TV.

I think it has to do more with greed than anything else. I've seen families show solidarity and refuse to talk to the press, and they just get a distant uncle or a neighbor on instead.

Hate to say it, but at least in FL. you are correct.:(

"San Francisco Zoo officials Thursday said the enclosure for a Siberian tiger that killed a San Jose teenager and injured two friends in a Christmas rampage had a wall lower than they initially stated and below industry recommendations.

Zoo Director Manuel A. Mollinedo also said he believes the tiger escaped over that wall, although police said they still don't know what happened.

Mollinedo said the outer wall that separated 350-pound Tatiana from the viewing public is 12 feet, 5 inches high - not the 18 feet he reported Wednesday, and nearly 4 feet below minimum Association of Zoos and Aquariums guidelines for tigers.

Mollinedo said the AZA inspected the enclosure, built in 1940, three years ago as part of its regular accreditation program and it "never noted that as a deficiency." "

I don't buy the taugnting angle. What taunting would be required to get a well fed 300 lb tiger to jump a shear-sided 20 x 20 foot dry moat, where the opposing side is 12 feet higher?

• 50 lbs of Cat nip loaded into a bong?
• Michael Jackson dangling some butter dipped kids over the side?
• Someone bringing in a pet tiger that's in heat?
• Telling the Tiger it looked like Rosie O’Donald?

The taunting story sounds like something PETA would have planted.

I agree, the taunting story seems like a plant.

It assumes that the tiger is justified because of the kids actions. The park has a duty to protect the public, no matter what(if anything) the public does.