Skip to comments.San Francisco police reviewing tiger victims' cell phones, car
Posted on 01/16/2008 12:35:55 PM PST by repinwi
San Francisco police today began their review of the cell phones and car belonging to the survivors of a Christmas Day tiger attack at the San Francisco Zoo, officials said.
< snip >
A San Francisco Superior Court judge granted a search warrant allowing police to examine the cell phones and car on Tuesday.
For police and city officials to get the warrant, they needed to show probable cause of felony wrongdoing, a city official said.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
AFTER they’ve already said there would be no charges?
What kind of person evades Christmas with the family and instead gets drunk and goes to the zoo?
"...Santa Clara County prosecutor Stuart Scott told Superior Court Judge Michele McKay McCoy on Tuesday that he will file a charge of battery on a police officer against 19-year-old Paul Dhaliwal.
Dhaliwal and his older brother, Kulbir, 23, already face two misdemeanor counts of public drunkenness and resisting arrest. The incident happened On Sept. 7, after police stopped them for questioning as they walked down a street near their home. Police were responding to reports of a fight and thought they looked suspicious...
They remind ne of a bulgular who falls through a skylight and wants to sue the building owner. Treat them like Columbo ... (lame AI reference from yesterdays show).
YOu gotta be a pretty big jerk to make me root for the tiger, but these guys look like they fit the bill.
Thanks, I’d not seen that.
One: Were they actually drunk? Two: Did they really have slingshots with them? Three: If they had been drinking what was their blood alcohol level? Four: Do you really think that someone deserves to be chewed and killed by a tiger for merely teasing it somewhat? Five: Where were the officials that are supposed to stop this type of teasing(if such really occured)? Six: Why are you not calling the zoo officials assclowns for having a fence 4 feet lower than reccomended for containing tigers?
To answer your question about who evades Christmas to go get drunk at the zoo, I really don't know. What I do know is that evading Christmas and getting drunk at the zoo isn't a death penalty offense.
They need to preserve evidence for the inevitable civil suit against the zoo, part of which is owned by the city.
If the guys were making a video for YouTube or something like “Jackass,” that needs to be known, as an aggravating factor.
. . . personal accountability . . .
Six: Why are you not calling the zoo officials assclowns for having a fence 4 feet lower than reccomended for containing tigers?
Well, the height of the wall was never an issue until these punks came along.
Anti-animal hate crime. The tiger is not guilty by reason of temporary insanity, and the police overreacted and shot a member of an underprivileged minority who should not be held accountable for reacting when provoked.
Sad to say but there are a whole bunch of morons who really believe that.
If indeed they were taunting the tiger, of course I don’t think they deserved to get killed for it. HOWEVER, they were endangering every other human at the zoo, which is incredibly irresponsible.
Then again, they had every reason to believe the tiger couldn’t get out.
Why? Man put a wild animal in a cage. The tiger sure would prefer to be at home in the wild. How would you like to be put in a cage? The perps that taunted the tiger should be in jail.
I back Tygger.
Uhhh, judging by their names, non-Christians who don't celebrate Christmas?
I'll bet the tiger thought so.
There are consequences for their actions even if they didn't like them. Reality smacked them upside the head and now they don't like it. Too bad.
If the cell phones have evidence that this was some sort of gang initiation or something, the other two guys should be charged with manslaughter, of homicide and shouldn't get a penny from the lawsuit they were so quick to file.