• Font Size    
E-mail

Close Window E-mail This Page

Change Of Venue In Tiger Attack Evidence Dispute

Required fields are marked with an asterisk(*)



The information you provide will be used only to send the requested e-mail and will not be used to send any other e-mail communications. Read more in our Privacy Policy

Send E-mail

   Print     Share +    Comments

Change Of Venue In Tiger Attack Evidence Dispute

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5 / AP / BCN) ― A dispute over possible evidence in the cell phones and car of two brothers who were mauled by a San Francisco zoo tiger was transferred Friday from San Francisco to Santa Clara Superior Court.

After a brief morning hearing, San Francisco Superior Court Commissioner Bruce Chan ordered a change of venue in the case. The judge granted attorney Mark Geragos' request to move the case to Santa Clara County, where the two brothers live.

Santa Clara Superior Courty Judge Socrates Manoukian immediately scheduled a hearing for next Wednesday and also issued a temporary order requiring San Francisco police to maintain custody of the personal property seized from the victims.

The San Francisco city attorney's office said the car and photos in the cell phones may contain crucial evidence that the victims taunted the tiger, provoking the animal to escape its pen.

Proof that the victims provoked the tiger would be neede to defend the city in any legal action against the zoo, the city attorney's office argued at Friday's hearing.

In court, Deputy City Attorney Sean Connolly told Chan that "something happened to provoke that attack" and said, "The city wants nothing more than the truth and wants that truth preserved."

City officials believe that cell phones, clothing and the car belonging to the three victims could offer proof that they were intoxicated and threw objects into the tiger enclosure shortly before the maulings, according to court documents filed in conjunction with the hearing.

Carlos Sousa Jr., 17, was killed in the Dec. 25 attack, and his friends—brothers Kulbir Dhaliwal, 23, and Paul Dhaliwal, 19 -- were severely injured.

"In particular, a large bottle of alcohol was observed inside the car along with apparent evidence of drug use," the documents said.

They also said the car may have contents that could be "consistent with objects that may have been used to pelt or taunt the tiger."

The documents do not elaborate on the apparent evidence of drug use or what items in the car may be linked to the foreign objects found in the tiger's pen.

But sources told CBS 5 that the debris inside the tiger grotto included strange rocks and metal disks that matched what police found inside the brothers' car.

The evening after the mauling incident, CBS 5 has learned that zoo security guards grew suspicious of two friends of the Dhaliwal brothers who showed up at a zoo service entrance.

The guard said they wanted to retrieve their friend's car. The guard refused, but that "the men pressed again, and again."

The security person said the men wore hooded sweaters, and one tried to keep his face hidden when "they asked if they could retrieve belongings form the car, including a celluar telephone."

The guard then asked for their identities, they refused, and immediately left the area.

Outside of court on Friday, Shepard Kopp, one of the lawyers for the Dhaliwal brothers, called the drug accusations "more character assassination."

Kopp said, "Nothing is going to come out of this that is incriminating," but added, "Our clients want their property back." 

Kopp and Geragos insisted that the victims did not taunt the 350-pound Siberian tiger, which zoo officials and experts believe leaped or climbed out of its enclosure.

Sousa's mother, Marilza, told the San Jose Mercury News earlier this week that she spoke with Paul Dhaliwal and he denied any taunting. The brothers have never spoken publicly about the incident.

The brothers' lawyers also argued that any evidence in the items sought by the city would be irrelevant because escape of a dangerous animal is covered by the concept of strict liability.

The concept would mean that the city and the zoo are legally liable for any harm caused regardless of any other factors.

But lawyers for the city contended in papers filed with Chan that the concept of strict liability doesn't apply to public entities.

(© CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. The Associated Press and Bay City News contributed to this report.)

Add Comment

here. here. Need a log in? Register here
  •  * Will not be displayed with comment
  •  * e.g. (http://www.mywebsite.com)
  •  
  • Click here to refresh with new letters

Close Window Login


Close Window Flag Comment


loading...
You need the latest Flash player to view video content.
Click here to download.

Click here to bypass this detection if you already have the latest Flash Player.