Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters said the child’s mother had three other children with her, and she was attending to them when the 3-year-old “just scampered off” on May 28. He said children’s services made a visit to the boy and mother, and social workers were impressed by the child’s environment.
Deters said the mother’s actions were “not even close” to meriting reckless endangerment charges.
Legal experts had said that prosecution on child endangerment or similar charges seems unlikely. The family has declined to comment.
More
The parents should, and probably will, sue the zoo for not having the enclosure secure enough to keep out a three year old. The zoo's negligence in preventing a "foreseeable" hazard that caused injury and the threat of death to the visitor's child, is a cause of action for compensable damages. Although the family has indicated they are not going to sue, the right lawyer hasn't spoken with them yet, or he / she has told the family to wait until they are sure they won't be charged (they won't). They will not walk away from the opportunity to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars, or more, for the injuries and threat to their child. Say what you will, but the zoo, and only the zoo, is responsible for what happened to the child, and what subsequently happened to the gorilla.
ReplyDelete11:21 BS. She is solely responsible for her child and his actions. Sorry she used the excuse that she was busy with so many other children. If she can't rear them and keep track of them, then she should not have had them.
ReplyDeleteThat Zoo has been in existence for decades and never had a problem, until now.
It is her fault and solely her fault.
My kids wouldn't have gotten away from me long enough to make it into the gorilla enclosure. With that said the zoo has the responsibility to make sure that it is not possible.
ReplyDeleteMy kids got their ass beat when they didn't listen to me the first time. At the zoo, there was no climbing on the fence.
ReplyDeleteI would say that both parties are at fault. The parents should have been watching their children more closely and the zoo should have made sure the enclosure was more secure. If a 4 year old can figure out a way in, who can't? I believe that the parents should not be charged, but they should not be able to sue the zoo either.
ReplyDeleteThe zoo is liable. The parents are not.
ReplyDeleteparents should have been shot, not the animal
ReplyDelete