America grieved with the parents who lost their child to an alligator…but why did they want to prosecute the parents whose child was almost mauled by a gorilla?

A few weeks ago a mom took her children to the zoo and her 3 year old toddler managed to get away from her grasp. He entered a gorilla’s area and the gorilla tossed him around like a rag doll. The zoo officials made the decision to kill the gorilla to save the child. Protesters appeared questioning the zoo’s decision to kill the gorilla. The parents were put under extreme scrutiny. The father’s criminal record which had nothing to do with situation were made public. A petition was launched calling for the parents to be prosecuted. No prosecution was launched but where was the love for them? In the Orlando situation the father was walking with his toddler son and his son was wading in shallow water when he was attacked by an alligator. The child was killed and this is tragic, but the parents were never vilified they received universal sympathy. The father was immediately hailed as a model father. No one asked why would a 3 year old be allowed to wade into Floridian water? No they received grace pure and simple and that is what the family in Ohio should have also received.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

Comments

  • Invisible Mikey  On June 18, 2016 at 9:31 pm

    One problem is people making snap judgments after a tragedy, urging action before knowing full details of what happened. The zoo event and the alligator attack aren’t really similar. In the case of the gorilla, it happened in a human-built habitat, under constant monitoring. Authorities had to examine whether the child had been supervised properly by the parents, but also whether barriers and safety procedures were adequate. They have been increased now.

    In the Florida case, the alligator was acting like an alligator in it’s own environment, the family was from Nebraska (not familiar with the danger), and there were no signs to warn them about alligators, or fences to impede wildlife, just a sign not to swim, which no one was doing. I’m not a lawyer, but it sounds like a higher level of liability on Disney’s part than in the zoo case, especially given that there have been previous attacks over the years. Disney is adding all sorts of fencing and signs now, but I would still bet there’s a wrongful death lawsuit to come.

%d bloggers like this: