http://www.litigationanimation.com/Featured.html
This scenario is from the company that did the animation for the injured parties in the tiger escape incident at the San Francisco zoo.
Courtesy of klsdad
Friday, December 24, 2010
Interesting "Final Fantasy" type video, although it doesn't show much
Posted by
Wade G. Burck
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
You ever heard of this?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20101224/sc_livescience/elusivesaharancheetahcapturedinphotos
Anonymous,
Wow, no I hadn't heard of this discovery. I have pondered why, given the Cheetahs historic small genetic pool there has been little change in the species, with the exception of the King. Thank you for the link. Time to find out as much as we can about this animal.
Wade
Wade,
I do not think that the animated video about the method that Tatiana could have used to get over the wall is possible when you read the necropsy report and understand how badly her hind feet were injured. If the incident had happened as the video proposes, then her hind feet would not have been injured at all.
The article about the Saharan cheetahs was fascinating. This is an amazing adaptation, to live in the desert. However, sand cats have adapted, so I guess that it is possible that cheetahs could have done so also.
Here is the link to Tatiana's necropsy report:
http://www.bayareanewsgroup.com/multimedia/mn/news/tiger_tatiana_necropsy_report.pdf
I still find this incident as sad as I did three years ago when it happened.
I hope that you had a wonderful Christmas.
Mary Ann
Mary Ann,
The hind feet with nails torn/frayed didn't mean anything to me initially, as it never stated what "torn/frayed" indicated. The back nails are as a rule "torn/frayed", as they are not sharpened or cleaned as much as the front feet. Having seen the exhibit in question before, but never looking directly down into the moat, how she got over the top never made sense, until I saw this "reenactment". I is not6hing but something that show's "her" supposed direction in escaping the enclosure. But,
you will note as the clip starts, and "she" heads down into the moat, there is apparently a concrete pillar with what looks like a hose, probably put there to keep the hose pipe from being hit by something and broken. I can's imagine a hose in the exhibit, but if the tiger jumped on top of that concrete pillar, depending on it's height, it may have been enough of a "boost" to "springboard" her up to the top of the wall. Jumping up from the floor, virtually impossible. Jumping up from/with the aid of a 3 or 4 ft. concrete "stool/chair"? That was doable on her worst day. I have more of an idea now that I have seen this "supposed reenactment" what may have happened, but I sure would have liked to have looked at the floor of the moat either the day before, or the day after.
Wade
Addendum to Mary Ann,
Apologies for the spelling error's. I am on a new key board, and am not quit used to it.
Wade
I don`t think this is the way it happend.
I think things happend this way:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWpo74Ba1aA
Stefan
Stefan,
I'm not wrong, this clip shows exactly what I said happened. All Randy Miller did was show that an animal can be "trained" to jump that high, and got paid a good sum of money for the commonly known fact.
The injured parties had to have been over the barrier, and up by the wall, "coaxing" the tiger up and over. No way were they standing away from the exhibit as the forensic video suggests. If witness's said they hear screaming and ran to the sound, that's where they were when the attack occurred, not what where they were at before the attack occurred. At least one of them had to have been at the wall and enticed the animal to jump up. Probably when it hit the top with it's front feet, is when they turned and ran, and they got as far as where they were depicted in the video. No way, no how were they standing there, and the tiger came over and out to them. Note in the Randy Miller video, each time the tiger got distracted or his mind wandered he had to be "encouraged" what Randy calls "bridged", and I call "raising your voice" or accentuating your movement to immediately attract their attention to what they are supposed to do. Note each time the animal jumped horizontally Randy was in it's field of vision. That is called tracking. Note when he jumps it vertically, he stays at it's side in it's peripheral field of vision, and although he does not have a "whip" his body position in chasing the tiger from behind(In front tracking, at the side or behind pushing". Note at 2:25 when the tiger attempts the 12'9'' he stops suddenly and Randy get's on the other side of the jump out of the tigers field of vision, and the tiger won't/can't make the jump until Randy comes back and "bridges" "raises his voice" to entice him again. Note at 2:15 there is a person momentarily on camera with a fence/barrier in addition to a white "string" to keep the tiger going straight and not veering to the left, which are all "aids". Also note the "target" on the ground in front of the vertical jump to give the tiger a place to jump from initially. The San Francisco tiger had none of the training or the aids, or somebody in it's field of vision "assisting" it. It would not have ran across the exhibit down the side, across the moat, and over the top, across the barrier, across the walkway and grab the victims. As Randy illustrated the tiger would have stopped when it when down the side into the moat, because the "target"(not prey as Randy says, that is the wrong term) would have gone out of it's field of vision, and it would have stopped. But if it was in the moat and the "target" was in it's field of vision(above) "bridging" or "raising it's voice" by accentuating it's movements, then it is conceivable that the tiger could attain that height and chase the target, which now to use the term correctly becomes prey. I'll bet my life she did not all of a sudden run across the exhibit, down the side, across the moat, up the wall, across the barrier and into the walkway to grab the victims. No way, no how. She was enticed from the bottom of the moat and over by somebody at the wall, who couldn't run as fast as she could.
Wade
Wade, the way you describe the incident is what I believed right from the start, although I don't have the knowledge that you do to describe how or why. It's such a shame that Tatiana had to be the victim of these guys, and that she had to pay with her life. I had hoped for some time that the authorities could prove that the incident occurred as you describe, and that she could at least be vindicated posthumously, but of course that is not what happened. The perpetrators managed to portray themselves as innocent victims. As a result, zoos all over the country raised the walls on their moated lion and tiger exhibits, and/or converted to glass.
Mary Ann
Mary Ann,
"Vindicated?" Vindicated for what? She was a carnivorous predator, who over takes prey through stealth, speed, and power, and destroys it. What's to vindicate? She performed admirably and with great courage. I'm proud of her. Regardless of "fault", if she had sprouted wings and flown out of the exhibit, SF would be liable, and all exhibits would then have roofs, in an effort to prevent the same thing from happening, the next time a tiger sprouted wings. If the exhibit had been chain link or solid bars, there is less chance a incident like that would ever occur. Humm........
Wade
Post a Comment