Tcali Posted November 14, 2008 Posted November 14, 2008 They would never pay her anywhere near what she'll make if she wins this suit. Linkage Reports are that these guys were whipping pine cones at the tiger and maybe some other stuff. Well if thats true...then just the medical should be paid....no extra compensation.STILL....the ZOO is at fault . There are reports that a few times in the past people had seen the paws of a tiger above the top of the enclosure. Something unintentional could have provoked the tigers and caused another tragedy.
Steely Dan Posted November 14, 2008 Author Posted November 14, 2008 Well if thats true...then just the medical should be paid....no extra compensation.STILL....the ZOO is at fault . There are reports that a few times in the past people had seen the paws of a tiger above the top of the enclosure. Something unintentional could have provoked the tigers and caused another tragedy. That's speculation.
Tcali Posted November 14, 2008 Posted November 14, 2008 That's speculation. Well...i heard a woman say that she saw that. I believe her. If they could get out of their enclosure once I am sure they came very close other times. Common sense tells us that. We shouldn't be dependant on the moods of wild animals to keep them from the public.
Steely Dan Posted November 14, 2008 Author Posted November 14, 2008 Well...i heard a woman say that she saw that. I believe her. If they could get out of their enclosure once I am sure they came very close other times. Common sense tells us that. We shouldn't be dependant on the moods of wild animals to keep them from the public. If this were a case where nobody had a hand in it and it was completely just because the enclosure was too low then I'd say ok but these kids got what they had coming to them. IMO
Just Jack Posted November 15, 2008 Posted November 15, 2008 And hit the bus. They should counter-sue for damages to the bus and loss of income while the bus was out of service for the accident investigation.
Steely Dan Posted December 24, 2008 Author Posted December 24, 2008 More news on this ridiculous lawsuit. Linkage Matt Dorsey, a spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera, said Tuesday the city's agreements with the nonprofit San Francisco Zoological Society means the zoo must decide whether to settle. "We do hope that all of the parties involved in the case can reach a just resolution," Dorsey said. "We also recognize what a difficult tragedy this has been for the Sousa family and our hearts go out to them." If I could I'd pay every dime of the attorney's fees to fight this. If these mooks get a payday then what's to stop other mooks?
Nanker Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 I hope it goes to trial and the judge requires a reenactment at the scene. Let the new tiger have a go at these two dork reprobates.
Steely Dan Posted December 24, 2008 Author Posted December 24, 2008 I hope it goes to trial and the judge requires a reenactment at the scene.Let the new tiger have a go at these two dork reprobates. I wish there had been a camera watching what they were doing before the attack. I think people would see a lot that would make anyone have sympathy for them.
KD in CA Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 Bingo. No way these three upstanding citizens were not provoking that tiger. That tiger didn't go crazy, that tiger went "tiger"! Matt Dorsey, a spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera, said Tuesday the city's agreements with the nonprofit San Francisco Zoological Society means the zoo must decide whether to settle. "We do hope that all of the parties involved in the case can reach a just resolution," Dorsey said. "We also recognize what a difficult tragedy this has been for the Sousa family and our hearts go out to them." If I could I'd pay every dime of the attorney's fees to fight this. If these mooks get a payday then what's to stop other mooks? You are paying every dime of the attorney's fees for this and every other case of its kind. Welcome to another reason why your taxes are so high and you get nothing for it. I dated a NYC attorney some years ago who handled lawsuits against the city from people who tripped on potholes, slipped on the subway platform or rode their bikes through red lights into the side of a bus -- some of her stories were mind boggling. Because the cost of taking these cases to trial and the risk of losing big is so high, these cases always settle out of court. And that means free money for the scumbags out of your pocket. Sadly, we have a populous that is sympathetic to such lawsuits and a judiciary that rewards ignorance, laziness and greed. Until that changes, expect more of the same. Something to think about next time you step into a voting booth.
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 24, 2008 Posted December 24, 2008 More news on this ridiculous lawsuit. Linkage Matt Dorsey, a spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera, said Tuesday the city's agreements with the nonprofit San Francisco Zoological Society means the zoo must decide whether to settle. "We do hope that all of the parties involved in the case can reach a just resolution," Dorsey said. "We also recognize what a difficult tragedy this has been for the Sousa family and our hearts go out to them." If I could I'd pay every dime of the attorney's fees to fight this. If these mooks get a payday then what's to stop other mooks? Scumbag lawyers have to make a living too!
Acantha Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 http://www.ktvu.com/news/19602045/detail.html Settled....win for the dorks.
Tcali Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 http://www.ktvu.com/news/19602045/detail.html Settled....win for the dorks. yes--they are dorks---but a ZOO needs to be dork proof. The fact is that the lions got out of their enclosure. Fault of the zoo .
Acantha Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 yes--they are dorks---but a ZOO needs to be dork proof. The fact is that the lions got out of their enclosure. Fault of the zoo . Honestly, I don't care either way.
Alaska Darin Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 Well...i heard a woman say that she saw that. I believe her. If they could get out of their enclosure once I am sure they came very close other times. Common sense tells us that. We shouldn't be dependant on the moods of wild animals to keep them from the public. Why not? I think it's too bad that Darwin didn't completely win in this case. Whip a pine cone at a tiger, get eaten. Seems fair.
WellDressed Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 Linkage If these kids see dime one from this I'll puke! How's that dehydrated diarrhea problem going??
Alaska Darin Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 How's that dehydrated diarrhea problem going?? 9106 posts in and no signs of slowing...
Fewell733 Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 most likely the zoo will be strictly liable since it's a wild animal, but the brothers damages will be reduced by their comparative responsibility, which is decided by a jury. and really it'll just settle like almost all cases do.
billybob Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 If this were a case where nobody had a hand in it and it was completely just because the enclosure was too low then I'd say ok but these kids got what they had coming to them. IMO We all got it coming, kid.
Tcali Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 Why not? I think it's too bad that Darwin didn't completely win in this case. Whip a pine cone at a tiger, get eaten. Seems fair. Yeah--but the problem is some completely innocent people could have been killed as well. Those lions did and could get out of the enclosure. There were reports of the lions jumping up and getting a paw over the fence before. The zoo did nothing.
Wacka Posted May 29, 2009 Posted May 29, 2009 Great reading comprehension here. The thread title says Tiger(which it was) and the latest people are talking about lions.
Recommended Posts