re SF Zoo tiger incident. Mike said that the guys were in the zoo after hours. That's not the case. It was near closing time, but the zoo was not closed. The implication I think Mike was making was that these stoner kids snuck into the zoo and were asking for trouble. That's just not the case (they may have been asking for trouble, but the zoo was clearly at fault... animals need to be protected from visitors, and visitors need to be protected from animals).
Sent by Marc Naimark | 7:14 PM | 6-6-2008
Another Pesca moment: "geeps" exist, at least according to a certain... Robert Krulwich! Listen to Radio Lab! Good stuff there.
Sent by Marc Naimark | 7:27 PM | 6-6-2008
That was me, not Mike. I said (and I think correctly) that the victims were in the zoo after closing time. I didn't mean to imply they had snuck in. But if you google the story you will find that the attack happened shortly after closing time.
Mike simply echoed my information and then (going off of his memory, not quite accurately as it turns out) asked me if there was video of the young men going into the tiger enclosure. I clarified that the attack occurred away from the enclosure itself and that the zoo was at fault for having an enclosure that was four feet short of the acceptable standard. And that they were criticized for their response to the attack.