Tiger kills man at San Francisco Zoo (Part 2)

[Nova]

It is a different deal. One doesn't give an account of events because they want to consult with an attorney first, because anything they say can and will be used against them in a court of law. I can understand that and does not imply guilt.
but one does not need to consult an attorney regarding one's name and one's name has no bearing on future court preceedings.
People do not give their names because they do not want it known who they are for some reason.

J, what you say is very logical, but I'm sure you'll agree humans don't always react logically. For most of us middle-class types, who enjoy pretty good relations with LE over the course of our lives, I think it's hard to understand that some people have a longstanding hostility toward the police and their first instinct is to be uncooperative.

Whether that hostility is justified is another, very long discussion. But there's no question that it exists in some quarters.

 

[Lurker]

It was Christmas Day, when Sousa didn't show up for Christmas dinner, the father called the brothers. This was, of course, before his death. The brothers still haven't been willing to speak to Sousa's father, or that was the word as of two days ago..

Nice..

 

[Buzz Mills]

The last report I heard on this incident, the zoo worker did not lose her arm. She was severely injured in the arm because it was bit as she was feeding the tiger. Somehow I can't blame the tiger for going for the raw meat and not knowing the difference between it and the arm. She has had several surgeries, but has not lost the arm so it's a bit dramatic and misleading to say the arm was "torn off".

The tiger degloved (medical language for pulling all the flesh away from the bone) the girls forearm. i thought she had lost the arm.

 

[fundiva]

I did not know that - it does look bad for the zoo that all these facts that turn out to be untrue keep getting released. If I were a zoo who had an escaped tiger who had killed and mauled a paying customer or three on Christmas Day a year after maiming one of my workers, I'd be shuffling to spin spin spin the story to my benefit in any way possible. It's not laudable behavior but it is understandable.

It doesn't look any better for the brothers every time they are caught in a lie as well - telling Souza's dad that he wasn't with them; telling the press they had talked with the dad to say his son was a hero, but the dad never talked to them, etc.

 

[Jade]

The last report I heard on this incident, the zoo worker did not lose her arm. She was severely injured in the arm because it was bit as she was feeding the tiger. Somehow I can't blame the tiger for going for the raw meat and not knowing the difference between it and the arm. She has had several surgeries, but has not lost the arm so it's a bit dramatic and misleading to say the arm was "torn off".

Will try to find a source when I get a break but it was another female cat keeper that got her arm torn off. Accidentally got too close giving family a behind the scenes tour? Maybe in Florida?

Most of the animals from parrots to primates to cats will bite, claw, scatch any body parts that become unexpectedly available.

 

[fundiva]

The tiger degloved (medical language for pulling all the flesh away from the bone) the girls forearm. i thought she had lost the arm.

On either Greta or one of the news shows one of the people were mentioning the incident and said she had lost her arm. She was corrected by someone else that said she had had surgeries, but she still had her arm. I am going by their statement as they seemed to have that information.

 

[southcitymom]

Did they tell Sousa's father they hadn't seen him before the attack or after? Please tell me it was before all of this happened.

Yes - before the attack.

 

[southcitymom]

It is a different deal. One doesn't give an account of events because they want to consult with an attorney first, because anything they say can and will be used against them in a court of law. I can understand that and does not imply guilt.
but one does not need to consult an attorney regarding one's name and one's name has no bearing on future court preceedings.
People do not give their names because they do not want it known who they are for some reason.

I do see where you are coming from, JBean, and like I said - you might be right on. It's just that I can also completely buy a different scenario where they're freaked and in trauma and sort of jerk-offs with the cops anyway and just decide not to say a single word.

 

[southcitymom]

I think the only case the zoo may have to pay out on will be for Souza. The brothers may get some money from the zoo, but they will also have to prove damages. So far they do not seem to have extensive damages. They are not disfigured, they have all their limbs with no permanent damage to them, they do not need plastic surgery. Heck, they walked out of the hospital in less than a week without a limp, scratch or bandage visible. If I was on a jury I could see them getting their medical paid for, maybe loss of wages but not much more. On top of that, I would look at their responsibility for the accident and deduct their percentage of comparative negligence from the total damages. So if they got $50,000 and were 50% negligent they would end up with $25,000. Probably barely enough to pay their attorney and experts.

We do not - of course - know the nature of the brother's medical damages and you are absolutely correct that medical bills (past and future related to the injuries), any permanant scarring or loss of use - loss of wages if they work, etc... will figure into play.

However, if evidence leads a jury (at trial) or the attorneys (plaintiff and defense in settlement discussions) to believe that the zoo knew of this problem and didn't fix it, punitive damages could be sky high. Additionally - what is the value of the mental & psychological torment of being attackeds by an escaped tiger more than once, watching that tiger kill your friend and finally making it to help to be told by zoo officials that you're lying - I think that value could be very high as well.

Now, of course, if they contributed to their own injuries and somehow encouraged or enabled the tiger to escape, their damages will drop in relation - but nothing those brothers might have done is going to save the zoo from paying dearly out of its pockets, IMHO.

 

[southcitymom]

It was Christmas Day, when Sousa didn't show up for Christmas dinner, the father called the brothers. This was, of course, before his death. The brothers still haven't been willing to speak to Sousa's father, or that was the word as of two days ago..

Buzz - I'll try to go find the article, but Souza's family said the brothers did call after they got out of the hospital and the brothers told Souza's family we are so sorry and tried to help save him. This happened the day after Souza's family had complained to the media about not hearing a word from the brothers.

But, the last I heard, the brother's called. The article is in this thread - I will try to find it.

 

[southcitymom]

J, what you say is very logical, but I'm sure you'll agree humans don't always react logically. For most of us middle-class types, who enjoy pretty good relations with LE over the course of our lives, I think it's hard to understand that some people have a longstanding hostility toward the police and their first instinct is to be uncooperative.

Whether that hostility is justified is another, very long discussion. But there's no question that it exists in some quarters.

You said this so much more clearly than I have been able to. I have an African American friend who was arrested once and wouldn't tell the police one single solitary word (including his name) on principal. Not because he was hiding his name for any particular reason but because he doesn't trust the police. Many in that community have a similar feeling.

 

[JBean]

J, what you say is very logical, but I'm sure you'll agree humans don't always react logically. For most of us middle-class types, who enjoy pretty good relations with LE over the course of our lives, I think it's hard to understand that some people have a longstanding hostility toward the police and their first instinct is to be uncooperative.

Whether that hostility is justified is another, very long discussion. But there's no question that it exists in some quarters.

I hate to admit it, I do not enjoy a good relationship with our local LE. I have issues with them and generally find them to be dishonest. That is why the advice to my children if they are ever arrested is to say nothing without an attorney. This is the reason I understand why they are not talking. but not revealing one's identity when one is a victim is nonsensical. This does not fall under the same heading as not recounting an event.
Sorry you guys,but they did not want to be known at that time.

 

[JBean]

You said this so much more clearly than I have been able to. I have an African American friend who was arrested once and wouldn't tell the police one single solitary word (including his name) on principal. Not because he was hiding his name for any particular reason but because he doesn't trust the police. Many in that community have a similar feeling.

You think these 2 were standing on principle? LMAO.
If it walks like a duck.....


ETA: Besdies you guys are forgetting that they weren't 'caught" for anything nor were they being arrested. they were being picked up by ambulances as victims of a tiger attack. Think about it.

 

[JBean]

Buzz - I'll try to go find the article, but Souza's family said the brothers did call after they got out of the hospital and the brothers told Souza's family we are so sorry and tried to help save him. This happened the day after Souza's family had complained to the media about not hearing a word from the brothers.

But, the last I heard, the brother's called. The article is in this thread - I will try to find it.

Suzanne Espinosa Solis, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, December 31, 200712-30) 21:27 PST San Francisco -- The father of the 17-year-old boy who was killed by a tiger at the San Francisco Zoo said Sunday that he would like to hear from the two young men who survived the attack.
"I would love to talk to them. I would love to hear from them," Carlos Sousa Sr. told The Chronicle.
Sousa was responding to reports Sunday by some news outlets that claimed that brothers Kulbir Dhaliwal, 23, and Paul Dhaliwal, 19, had phoned him to say they were sorry and had done everything they could to save his son, Carlos Sousa Jr., in the Christmas Day attack.
But Sousa, reached at his home in San Jose on Sunday night, said he had not heard from his son's friends, who were released from San Francisco General Hospital on Saturday.
"They have not called me," Sousa said. "Last time I talked to them is when they told me my son wasn't with them, and the next day I found out my son was dead, and that makes me a little angry, but there's nothing I can do." more at link:http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl.../BAB2U7625.DTL

 

[southcitymom]

You think these 2 were standing on principal? LMAO.
If it walks like a duck.....


ETA: Besdies you guys are forgetting that they weren't 'caught" for anything nor were they being arrested. they were being picked up by ambulances as victims of a tiger attack. Think about it.

On their principal - yes, JBean. 60 Minutes or one of those shows did a whole segment on this sort of thing within the African American community - ie: Not talking to LE about anything and hiding everything you can to make LE's job more difficult. I don't find it tough to accpet that these brothers may have a similar mindset.

ETA - I'm not forgetting that LE wasn't arresting them. I'm saying that their distrust of LE might have been completely pervasive.

 

[southcitymom]

Suzanne Espinosa Solis, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, December 31, 200712-30) 21:27 PST San Francisco -- The father of the 17-year-old boy who was killed by a tiger at the San Francisco Zoo said Sunday that he would like to hear from the two young men who survived the attack.
"I would love to talk to them. I would love to hear from them," Carlos Sousa Sr. told The Chronicle.
Sousa was responding to reports Sunday by some news outlets that claimed that brothers Kulbir Dhaliwal, 23, and Paul Dhaliwal, 19, had phoned him to say they were sorry and had done everything they could to save his son, Carlos Sousa Jr., in the Christmas Day attack.
But Sousa, reached at his home in San Jose on Sunday night, said he had not heard from his son's friends, who were released from San Francisco General Hospital on Saturday.
"They have not called me," Sousa said. "Last time I talked to them is when they told me my son wasn't with them, and the next day I found out my son was dead, and that makes me a little angry, but there's nothing I can do." more at link:http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl.../BAB2U7625.DTL

I saw this one and read it - and then I saw another link a day or so later saying the brother's had called Souza's Dad. I remember this because I was going to comment on it, but got distracted and didn't. Still looking for that link.

Again - I don't know if it's true that the brothers called. I just know I read a story saying they called.

 

[Pharlap]

I saw this one and read it - and then I saw another link a day or so later saying the brother's had called Souza's Dad. I remember this because I was going to comment on it, but got distracted and didn't. Still looking for that link.

Again - I don't know if it's true that the brothers called. I just know I read a story saying they called.

The father was on a lot of news stations saying they didn't get a call at ALL.

 

[Nova]

I hate to admit it, I do not enjoy a good relationship with our local LE. I have issues with them and generally find them to be dishonest. That is why the advice to my children if they are ever arrested is to say nothing without an attorney. This is the reason I understand why they are not talking. but not revealing one's identity when one is a victim is nonsensical. This does not fall under the same heading as not recounting an event.
Sorry you guys,but they did not want to be known at that time.

I don't believe SCM meant "principle" is the most abstract, noble sense. Just that some people have points of view that make them automatically refuse to cooperate.

The distinction between "suspect" and "victim" that you are making isn't automatically clear to people who have a bad history with LE (even if that bad history is their own damn fault).

I think the differences in views of LE was made rather painfully clear during the O.J. criminal trial. While it was absurd to many of us that 40-some police officers would instantly risk their careers by agreeing to frame an innocent celebrity, it was not so absurd to members of the jury.

Not too long afterward, the Rampart scandal made it clear why some residents of inner-city L.A. found the idea of a vast police conspiracy all too reasonable.

Two perfectly reasonable people can draw quite different conclusions if they begin with different assumptions or "givens." At this point, we just don't know what assumptions the brothers brought with them to the zoo that day.

 

[Nova]

The father was on a lot of news stations saying they didn't get a call at ALL.

Of course, that leaves the possibility that the brothers tried to call but failed to reach the dead boy's father.

But let's assume they never called. We know they accompanied Sousa as he blew off Christmas dinner and took a jaunt to the zoo. The brothers lied to Sousa's father before the attack. Sousa ended up dead.

They might not be calling their friend's father because they feel really, really bad about what they did that day EVEN IF they did nothing to provoke the tiger.

Avoiding their dead friend's father may not be admirable, but it doesn't necessarily mean they provoked the attack on their friend and themselves.

And I would be very surprised if the brothers' lawyer has NOT told them the dead boy's family will be suing for wrongful death; the Sousas are NOT your friends; don't talk to them.

 

[southcitymom]

The father was on a lot of news stations saying they didn't get a call at ALL.

Okay - I will take your word for it. It truly doesn't matter to me one way or another, but I still think I saw an article saying they called.