WHO'S MOST TO BLAME?

City Powers' attempt to pin the tiger escape on the victims has failed, at least according to this SFGate story:

S.F. Zoo mauling investigation winding down

The purpose of the SFPD investigation, it seemed, was to turn up evidence that the victims had committed a crime, also (and I wonder how legal this was) to discover evidence that would help the City defend any tiger related law suits.

Anyway, the victims were treated like criminals.

The police investigation into the tiger attack at the San Francisco Zoo will soon be reclassified as "inactive" after a search failed to turn up evidence that the victims taunted the animal or committed other crimes, authorities said Friday.

With plenty of leaked information about marijuana, vodka, eyewitnesses, and rap sheets, everything was done to vilify the victims. I’d like to know Manuel Mollinedo’s blood alcohol level at the time of the attack.

No wonder poll results (non-scientific) show overwhelming public opinion still blaming the kids.

This graphic appears right next to the news story cited above.

I guess San Franciscans don’t require evidence to form an opinion.

Meanwhile, what about criminally negligent homicide charges against Mollinedo?

1. He knew (or should have known) it was unsafe.
2. He told potential visitors that it was safe.
3. A visitor died.

Clearly so far, City Powers is incapable of investigating itself, proving once again, that when push comes to shove, SF behaves like a xenophobic little hick town.

----- o -----