These comments are inapposite if the men did something to aid the tiger in its escape. But taunting is not enough. I ate toast today. I did not choose the piece of bread because it taunted me; I chose it because it is a food source.

There is no duty to keep confidential something overheard. The speaker did not give that information to a medical professional (or para). He made statements in the presense of a third party – no way to keep something confidential.

“that no other tiger escaped until this … devalues … “wall is not tall enough” braying”

How so? If my son doesn’t open the undersink cabinet and drink bleach until he is four years old, does that somehow mean the bleach in the unlocked cabinet has always been adequately secured?

Where all circumstances are unchanged “It never happened before” means exactly the same as “It could have happened any time.”

As we all know, it does not matter if the zoo had met or even exceeded all safety standards.

Also, the fact that no other tiger escaped until this incident pretty much devalues the whole crybaby “wall is not tall enough” braying

They shouldn’t bother. These two drunks’ behavior not only means they’re at least as much at fault for this as the zoo, they weren’t hurt any more than they’d have been in a moderately bad car accident. If they get the zoo to cover their medical expenses, they should consider themselves fortunate.

The dead guy is a different matter. According to the witness who is talking, he wasn’t taunting the tiger. His only failing was having such stupid friends. He is dead because the zoo had a wall that was several feet below safety standards and because those friends were idiots. His family has grounds to sue both the zoo and these two jerks.

While I think that the youth have a right to their medical records being kept confidential, why should this extend to non-medical info? If I am being treated fo a knife wounds and comment,”at least the XXXX won’t be messing with my wife anymore!” is that also to be kept private?