SF Zoo Tiger Attack "Victim" Goes to Prison

good that punk won't win a dime.

They were taunting that tiger, no doubt about it!

That is going to play into any award they may receive.

chevelle_ss wrote:

good that punk won't win a dime.

so, apparently, occassionally there is justice. you know if only those 2 had declared themselves republicans, we could have got at the truth.

Regardless of "taunting" the fence should have still been the recommended height. The zoo operators should prepare for every eventuality or else they should be considered negligent. You mean to tell me that out of the tens of thousands of people that visit such a busy zoo, they never expected any of the patrons to "taunt" the animals. Wake up sheeple and get a clue! And the brother's other legal troubles should not effect this lawsuit anyway. I don't care how nuch "taunting" was done, if the enclosure was safe, there should be no way of an animal escaping, no matter what the circumstances.

harmonious wrote:

<quoted text> so, apparently, occassionally there is justice. you know if only those 2 had declared themselves republicans, we could have got at the truth.

Another escapee from the party of "unity"
GFY.

The dumb@ss should have to pay for the tiger that they had to put down.

...suppose 'Bubba, Inc.' on Dblock has been keepin' up with this story & hopefully is a cat lover... that particular cat.

There is quite often a cost incurred if 'people' want to play jackass games.

We still don't know exactly how the tigers escaped and some ppl commenting already have these guys guilty.
Makes you wonder....ppl look at the picture of the guy and make judgements

I make no judgement on his looks, he looks like a regular guy to me.

What I question is did anyone see them pestering the tiger?

Anger feeds adrenaline, probably enough for the tiger to get over that fence even if it was another 5 feet or so.
Animal run on instinct, some people run on stupidity.
Animals are dangerous even in a zoo.

:-/

Bobby wrote:

We still don't know exactly how the tigers escaped and some ppl commenting already have these guys guilty.
Makes you wonder....ppl look at the picture of the guy and make judgements

This is quoted from story lines:

Of course, please note the word "recommended." Even if it was too low, there isn't a legal requirement for height, just a recommendation. This, plus the alleged taunting, as well as the legal problems of both Paul Kulbir, are why the word victim appears in quotes.

Despite this, of course, the brothers have sued.

Well, if Paul is going to enjoy his money (assuming they win or settle), it will be in prison.

He has been sentenced to 16 months in prison for violating probation in a felony reckless driving case.

He was arrested in March for shoplifting.[End clip from story]

Seems like a court of record found his ass guilty of something.

Inquiry wrote:

The dumb@ss should have to pay for the tiger that they had to put down.

Amen to that. It's his fault that tiger is dead; why did that beautiful animal have to pay for this idiot's stupidity?

Bama Belle wrote:

<quoted text>
Amen to that. It's his fault that tiger is dead; why did that beautiful animal have to pay for this idiot's stupidity?

Unfortunately, it would probably try again and it might start going after the handlers.
Sad, a beautiful animal and rare. Stupid people are a dime a dozen.

:-/

Chris Williams wrote:

Regardless of "taunting" the fence should have still been the recommended height. The zoo operators should prepare for every eventuality or else they should be considered negligent. You mean to tell me that out of the tens of thousands of people that visit such a busy zoo, they never expected any of the patrons to "taunt" the animals. Wake up sheeple and get a clue! And the brother's other legal troubles should not effect this lawsuit anyway. I don't care how nuch "taunting" was done, if the enclosure was safe, there should be no way of an animal escaping, no matter what the circumstances.

OH shut the F@uck up. Regardless of the fence, this GROWN man, should not HAVE been taunting this animal. You are as much of an idiot as him. He already had a long criminal record and deserves no money and to spend a long time in jail.

I hope he comes to PB, I sure can use a %bitch% so do the other men.

Chris Williams wrote:

Regardless of "taunting" the fence should have still been the recommended height. The zoo operators should prepare for every eventuality or else they should be considered negligent. You mean to tell me that out of the tens of thousands of people that visit such a busy zoo, they never expected any of the patrons to "taunt" the animals. Wake up sheeple and get a clue! And the brother's other legal troubles should not effect this lawsuit anyway. I don't care how nuch "taunting" was done, if the enclosure was safe, there should be no way of an animal escaping, no matter what the circumstances.

It's the SF Zoo's fault. The animals should have been contained so as not to get out. I guess if you tease a person it's ok if they kill you. hhmmm. Look out world! The SF Zoo needs to pay- period.

stop making excuses for a$$holes and thats what those guys were. even a tiger biting your butt didn't teach them anything and they are continuing to be a burden to society by going to jail now. they should be given the community service job of cleaning out animal cages----while they are still in them.

Todd wrote:

<quoted text> It's the SF Zoo's fault. The animals should have been contained so as not to get out. I guess if you tease a person it's ok if they kill you. hhmmm. Look out world! The SF Zoo needs to pay- period.

You are insane. It is always the folks like you that will make excuses for every low life there is; along with the problems they cause or the laws they break. This is good to know. So that when a scum like this breaks into your house and you shot him in self defense, we can all blame you, insist you pay damages and go to jail yourself. This guy had a long criminal history, and yet you blame the zoo for this guys law breaking activities. You must be a blood sucking lawyer that would defend the worst of the worst. Someone without any moral values. That can be the only answer to your moronic reply.

My sympathy level for the Dhaliwal brothers and the unfortunate Mr. Sousa is curiously low.

Its very simple if you f**k with a wild animal they will kill you that is their nature. so if these idiots were taunting that animal then they had it coming you can blame the zoo all you want but that tiger had never jumped the fence before so what exactly did these morons do to piss this cat off that bad? why isn't he charged with involuntary manslaughter for the other guys death. He contributed to this guy dying, and now they want to sue because they were taunting an animal and it attacked them they don;t deserve a dime.

Todd wrote:

<quoted text> It's the SF Zoo's fault. The animals should have been contained so as not to get out. I guess if you tease a person it's ok if they kill you. hhmmm. Look out world! The SF Zoo needs to pay- period.

Animals are just animals and are unpredictable. Why would anyone go to a zoo just to taunt a wild animal? Kinda mean, wouldn't you say?
The cat paid the ultimate price here and the zoo lost money too. So by your words, the young man is all innocent,....hmmm.
I think he is responsible for his own actions, if he wasn't acting like an idiot, this would not off happened. He is also partly responsible for his friends death. Sad story no matter who's side your on.

:-/