Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

2 Year Old Boy Killed By Animals At Pittsburgh Zoo


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Wow, that poor poor child, and of course the other people who had to witness it (especially the fellow children that were probably there).

 

The mom on the other hand, good god! There's a reason there's a damn rail there and a ten foot drop, because to the surprise of many WILD ANIMALS CAN BE DANGEROUS IF YOU GET CLOSE! Not to mention dangling your kid ten feet from the ground isn't a good idea in the first place.

 

Seriously America, we already have the stupidity of Honey Boo Boo and her family representing our country, do we really need more?

 

But I suppose however people do make stupid mistakes, lets hope many of our citizens can learn from it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about this, the angrier it makes me. Entirely preventable, I'm sure the mother must feel awful but when did people get so bloody stupid?

 

She ought to forget about suing the park and think about putting together a defense against manslaughter charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this has been an interesting and tragic discussion thru the past 9 pages.....

 

Sadly, the end result is a child died.

 

Yes as a parent,(Which Robb and Elissa Passionately Are) this situation was avoidable. Certainly any parent should think twice before setting their 2 year old up on a rail (for better photos) for which this horrific event occured.

 

This amazing Zoo, which has a great long term record for guest safety will recover. The wonderful animals within the park will still have many visitors to see them, even if this child died.

 

This is a 'freak' occurance, and will most likely be settled 'out of court'. These aweful parents WILL become Millionares at the expense of their dead child. (this is why the zoo carries insurance)

 

But, when this aweful Mother is driving around in her new shinny 'BMW' or whatever, she will hopefully realize that this situation wasn't the zoo's mistake, but her own................(she ALONE caused her childs death) I Hope She Feels a bit Guilty, rather than just blaming the zoo!

 

Time and her conscience will tell............

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts and prayers go out to both the zoo and the mother who lost her child. This is one of those rare tragedys, we all react to in horror, trying to reason it out and place blame. I don't that anyone needs to that here, it's just an unfortunate accident.

 

I'm sure the mother can be blamed for her neglient behavior, and I would agree it was serious let down in what I'm sure is usually impeccable judgement. as a parent, I'm not going to critize her, she's in a world of hurt, and I can only hope she has a support group helping her through this terrible time.

 

I don't think the zoo is to blame, though I'm sure they need to rexamine this enclosure. It sounds like something that should never have happened, just an unlucky bounce.

 

The usual tendancy is to overreact in extreme cases like this, demanding for blame to placed, and extreme corrective action, but I hop that doesn't happen here. Both the mother and zoo has been punished enough. I only hope that when people catch their breath, they realize that and let things go.

 

This is a freak car accident, and sometimes there is no understanding it, or preventing it from happening again. And I hope the painted dogs are not put death over this. It is in theire nature, to be wild, just like a lion, tiger, or killerwhale.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, what solution do you propose to keep things like this from happening. People will do stupid things, it happens over and over. That's a fact of life. So how would you plan to keep someone from getting hurt, or would you let people die, over and over again. (I'm not trying to attack you, i'm trying to defend my statement, just as you are, please don't take it personally.)

The problem with this line of thought, IMHO, is that you would then be advocating a safety net..followed by a 2nd safety net for the safety net..etc.

 

How about if there is a 5ft barrier and then a 10 foot safety net and a crazy/stupid parent THROWS the child over the net? Are you then going to say that they should have had a 30 foot safety net? You can ALWAYS find a way around ANY safety precaution. In the courts you have to prove willful neglect..The zoo has 2-3 safety precautions in place.. the mother places her child OVER/ON TOP of a safety wall and then DROPS the child. How in the WORLD can you say the zoo is even PARTIALLY at fault..The point of a safety barrier is to provide an extra layer of precaution..not to cure stupidity Last I saw they don't even know if the child died from the mother dropping him or from the animals.

 

This is truly mind boggling.. It's called the common sense rule. If you are standing in the middle of a road and get hit by a car, do you then say that the car should have a safety measure to gently move you out of the way prior to impact? It's not like the lap restraint failed..the mother failed her child.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The point of a safety barrier is to provide an extra layer of precaution..not to cure stupidity

 

Quoted for truth

 

Maybe the zoo could start to change the sue happy nature of a large proportion of Americans, turn around and just tell the mother to face facts, she was acting irresponsibly and with no possible thought for her child's life, she deserves jail time, not money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is really terrible to read news like this. Especially because it could be avoided. I would hope people would be smarter than to bypass objects installed for their own safety to get a better 'look'. I can imagine they did. I know the feeding habits of wild african dogs and it ain't pretty. Knowing it was a child this happened to the people who saw this are probably traumatized for life.

But I can not put emphasis on this enough; guard rails are for your own protection. They are meant to keep you away from the real exhibit enclosures. Do not sit on top of them or cross over them!

A lot of people today miss common sense. They think that every animal is a pet. I think I have to tell people off at least once a week to please do not put your children over the railings. Most parents respond by getting mad at me. Nothing will happen to their child and the tigers are sleepy and on the other side of the exhibit. What works for me then is to say that to railings are also meant to protect from electrocution. (this is true, most exhibits are electrified to keep animals in). This usually helps because it is a danger people can relate to.

I think evolution has send humankind in the wrong direction and I hope this people will never go to real nature because they will not survive for five minutes.

Lucky for us our zoo is not in the US, the ability to make the zoo responsible for these accidents, while the people involved ignored the rules of the park and common sense, is just stupid.

Edited by vuurvogel
Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone is going to blame the zoo, I have a quote from a friend that will put all of that to rest:"You can never idiot proof something, because stupid people are the craftiest."

And my personal favorite:"common sense: the least common of the senses!"

Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds of the beheading incident at SFOG a couple of years ago. Does anyone know what the outcome of that was? I never heard other than the family was suing Six Flags because their idiot son jumped a fenced in barrier to retrieve a ball cap and lost his head.

 

I agree with those that say that incompetent and negligent people and their families should not be monetarily rewarded for breaking the rules in which one person loses their lives...especially in cases where signs and warnings were clearly posted.

 

This is just wrong on so many levels.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The more I think about this, the angrier it makes me. Entirely preventable, I'm sure the mother must feel awful but when did people get so bloody stupid?

 

She ought to forget about suing the park and think about putting together a defense against manslaughter charges.

 

This is a very interesting point. As a parent myself, I feel pain for what this mother must be going through right now. On the other hand, her actions are quite possibly criminal. Let's say that she was at in the mountains and put her child right on the edge of a cliff for a "better view". He then lost his balance and fell to his death. She could possibly be charged with involuntary manslaughter, at least negligence or child endangerment. However, since this happened at a zoo, there is a very real possibility that she will sue the zoo...and an equally real possibility that she will win and make money off of her own horrific decision. It's just so backwards that it's appalling. I really hope that the zoo doesn't get sued. If it does, I hope they are not found to be at fault. The blame lies entirely with the parent. For a court to rule otherwise would be a gross perversion of justice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^Sadly scooterdoug, there will be many lawyers 'drooling' out there for the chance to take on this no lose case.

 

The zoo won't want the negative publicity a 'public' trail will provide, so they will wish to.............settle.(quickly and quietly)

 

The zoo will not admit legal fault, and the parents will receive a LARGE sum of financial compensation.

 

Thats just the way it is, perhaps in judicial systems outside the 'USA', common sense would give the parents zip....but that WON'T happen here.

 

This is a freak situation, and the zoo will just want it to go away.............................

Link to post
Share on other sites

^Agreed. That is likely exactly how it will go down. In an ideal justice system, the zoo would not bear any fault and the mother would be held responsible for her actions. Unfortunately, our justice system is not ideal...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On the plus side, at least that's one less meal the zoo needed to feed the dogs.

Scott brings the jokes

this is a young mother that just witnessed her 2 year old baby get torn to shreds by dogs. I'm fairly certain that at least for the time being, there are other things on her mind than dollar signs.

Basic psychology theory says the family will try to rationalize the child's death by blaming the zoo and not their actions. The only thing the zoo can provide is monetary compensation. It will be pursued.

"The dingoes ate my baby"

Actually laughed out loud.

I usually give a sadistic laugh when an idiot does something to cause harm to himslelf, but when someone else has to suffer just out of stupidity, I just cannot stand it.

Quoted for accuracy

How anyone could blame the zoo is incomprehensible.

Quoted for truth

But still, it is the legal responsibility of the zoo to ensure the safety of all guests and to enforce the rules that they set down. Though, the blame can not be solely pinned on one person. Both parties are at fault here, not just the family.

Best practices ensure safety 99.9 percent of the time.. If I threw my baby over the suicide prevention walls at the Empire State Building observation deck. Is it partially the building's fault because they didn't build the walls high enough?

Everyone does stupid things, albeit some less extreme than others.Nobody is perfect, and people know that. Everyone should be prepared to cover their own stupid things, and to help others. It's what makes a community strong.

So if I drink and drive and kill a bunch of people (or my child) in an accident, should the community help me? should my car have had a system to prevent these deaths?

She ought to forget about suing the park and think about putting together a defense against manslaughter charges.

In America, it's tradition to not pursue charges on parents that have dead children in issues that could be perceived as accidents. State prosecutors typically only pursue these charges if the parents were under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

The zoo won't want the negative publicity a 'public' trail will provide, so they will wish to.............settle.(quickly and quietly).The zoo will not admit legal fault, and the parents will receive a LARGE sum of financial compensation.

This is EXACTLY what will happen. The zoo will also require the parents to sign a confidentiality agreement to prevent us from ever learning the terms and to prevent additional negative press to the situation.

 

 

If you are still reading this, this was one of the first TPR posts that actually made me sick to my stomach. As a new parent with a young child, the idea of this happening to him is incomprehensible. It's an image I never want to think about again.. That being said; we practice common sense. So, statistically, he'll be just fine.

 

chris

Link to post
Share on other sites
So if I drink and drive and kill a bunch of people (or my child) in an accident, should the community help me? should my car have had a system to prevent these deaths?

 

I was thinking the same thing...if this woman would have been drinking a few cocktails, slammed into a tree & killed her son, people would be at the trial spitting at her, cursing her & she would most likely do jail time and end up paying tons in legal fees. The media would be all over her and her family and her life would be pretty much ruined.

 

But because she did a random stupid act at a zoo, put her child in a very dangerous situation where the outcome was horrific, all of a sudden she will most likely end up rich as a result & people feel sorry for her?

 

Interesting that both situations are horrible decisions acted upon by the parent, but with (more than likely) two completely opposite outcomes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the burning stupidity of the incident, I doubt the parents are winning the lottery here. Sure, they may get a pay out. But it seems more likely to be of the "cheaper than going to court" variety where they sign away their right to ever sue them again. A post from an actual lawyer a few pages back seems to agree with me. A large settlement just isn't in the cards when you pull a stunt like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If you are still reading this, this was one of the first TPR posts that actually made me sick to my stomach. As a new parent with a young child, the idea of this happening to him is incomprehensible. It's an image I never want to think about again.. That being said; we practice common sense. So, statistically, he'll be just fine.

 

chris

As a non-parent I didnt finish the article.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/