If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)   Lawyer for family suing zoo is "outraged" that the zoo would "attack" the poor grieving family by pointing out their son probably wouldn't have died if Mom hadn't lifted him over the safety railing and them dropped him into a wild dog exhbit   (post-gazette.com) divider line 102
    More: Obvious, Maddox Derkosh  
•       •       •

15743 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Sep 2013 at 3:26 PM (44 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-09-12 03:29:09 PM
10 votes:
Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?
2013-09-12 03:46:37 PM
9 votes:
zoo should counter-sue for the cost of replacing the endangered animal they had to shoot in attempting to save the kid.
2013-09-12 03:28:37 PM
9 votes:

wee: scottydoesntknow: God forbid she actually owns up to her actions.

This is a woman who named her son "Maddox".  She probably already had a school picked out for the two year old.


Look, what part of Mom's story DON'T you understand?  The Plexiglass was DIRTY and HER son has VISION PROBLEMS!  So, OF COURSE she had to hoist him over the saftey railing and dangle him 15 feet over a pit of hungry predators, so he could get a better look.   AND There were NO signs saying that it could be dangerous to deliberatly bypass the Zoo's safety measures ANYWHERE.  Not to mention the Zooo CLEARLY should have provided some sort of complimentary Safety harness so she could hang on better, and Finally, what kind of negligent, poorly run Zoo doesn't have crack snipers with tranquilizer guns stationed at all their exhibit just in case a vistor makes a perfectly reasonable minor mistake and needs the Zoo staff to instantly rescue them?

It's simply MONSTROUS  that instead of fesing up to thie rmisdeed and abjectly apologizing with a 7 figure check, the Zoo has the copper-plated GALL to suggest MOM is somehow the one at fault here....
2013-09-12 02:30:34 PM
9 votes:
I really do feel sorry for the family, but she's a f*cking idiot.
2013-09-12 02:22:05 PM
9 votes:
Robert Mongeluzzi, who represents the Derkosh family, called the zoo's conduct "unconscionable."

"I think blaming the mother is unwarranted and wrong especially given that they were warned by their own employees of that very conduct," he said. "I think their attack on the Derkosh family is awful."


Telling the truth is NOT an attack. God forbid she actually owns up to her actions.
2013-09-12 02:24:36 PM
7 votes:
This is the America we've created.

Let's start putting parents over the railings.
2013-09-12 03:59:33 PM
6 votes:

Lollipop165: This is so common it amazes me. I run a rental building and during showings bring people to the roofdeck to let them see it. All the time, mom or dad will lift 3 year old Ayden over the brick railing for a better view. Or my personal favorite, when adults allow their toddlers to run around willy nilly in the dog run and let them pull the dog's ears. Cause you know, when the kid gets bit its the DOG'S fault, amiright?


Legally, yes.  And it pisses me off.  As far as I know no one has ever been able to sucessfully beat a "viscious dog" charge when someone decides that a dog biting them is a sign something is wrong with the dog.  I've lost dogs this way, so have plenty of other farkers.  People will illicit a bite from a dog and will take revenge on the animal for their ignorance of animal behavior.  Some people simply refuse to accept that animals respond differently and give different warnings than human beings.  It's as though they expect a dog st rear up on it's hind legs and say "I say, good fellow, if you continue in this behavior I shall be coerced into using force upon you" before biting.  I have never, and will never, believe a dog bit someone "without warning".  There is always warning, it may be barking, it may be growling, it may be ears pinned back, it may be flicking eyes back and forth (that's a real thing), it may be snapping, it may be sticking their tounge between their teeth (again, that's a thing), but there was SOME warning.
2013-09-12 05:32:51 PM
5 votes:
"I think blaming the mother is unwarranted and wrong especially given that they were warned by their own employees of that very conduct," he said.

I admit I can't quite figure out what he means by the second part of this sentence.  Warned of what conduct?  Saying "Well, you shouldn't have dangled your kid over the safety rail?"  SHE SHOULDN'T HAVE DANGLED HER KID OVER THE SAFETY RAIL.  I have a certain amount of sympathy for the woman, I'm sure she must be going through a kind of agony that the rest of us can barely begin to truly comprehend, but that does not change the fact that she did something outrageously stupid, and that tragedy resulted directly from HER actions.  And I'm pretty sure the zoo wouldn't be filing court documents saying "it was your fault" if she hadn't tried to sue them for something SHE did.  Just because she's going through hell doesn't mean the zoo should take responsibility for her idiocy.
2013-09-12 03:47:45 PM
5 votes:

grimlock1972: R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?

They would have to prove she deliberately dropped the kid and that is not an easy thing to do.


It doesn't have to be murder.  There are other charges such as child endangerment and even criminally negligent homocide.
2013-09-12 03:40:11 PM
5 votes:
Really? No one has posted this yet?
scrapetv.com
2013-09-12 03:32:45 PM
5 votes:
I'm impressed the zoo has the balls to counter-blame the parent.  Usually they just shut-up and settle, no?
2013-09-12 02:43:39 PM
5 votes:

scottydoesntknow: Robert Mongeluzzi, who represents the Derkosh family, called the zoo's conduct "unconscionable."

"I think blaming the mother is unwarranted and wrong especially given that they were warned by their own employees of that very conduct," he said. "I think their attack on the Derkosh family is awful."

Telling the truth is NOT an attack. God forbid she actually owns up to her actions.


There's no money in personal accountability.
2013-09-13 09:36:12 AM
4 votes:

gambitsgirl: onzmadi: It is people like this waste of oxygen that  we lose things like zoos. Its tragic the boy? died but using this as an opportunity for a payday is just beyond awful. I hope the mother gets Lou Gehrig's disease.

Not cool. That insults my husband who died of it



False. That comment has absolutely nothing to do with your husband. Not everything is about you.

Sorry for your loss, but get some perspective.
2013-09-13 08:59:44 AM
4 votes:

capt.hollister: heili skrimsli: Tatterdemalian: Just like those poor Menendez boys, shown leniency by the court because they were orphans in the cold hard world after they murdered their parents.

You don't think that happens? Here's an example:

grimlock1972: True true, but in anyway its a sticky situation. I wholeheartedly she should be charged with something, but no matter what punishment she might be given it would pale in comparison to having to live with the knowledge her stupidity cost the life of her child.

I think she should be jailed for the negligent manslaughter of her kid. And no, the fact that he's dead is not more punishment than her being in prison.

Not a parent, are you ?


Your argument would absolve any parent of criminal guilt if that parent kills his or her own child. By your logic, Susan Smith shouldn't be in prison and Andrea Yates should be free because it's so much worse punishment that their children are dead. Why bother putting Michelle Tharp in prison, because obviously she's been punished enough by the fact that her daughter starved to death.

If your kid dies of malnutrition because of your veganism we should just let it go, because nothing we can do is more punishment than the fact that your kid is dead? Should the parents who prayed instead of providing medical care to their diabetic child be let off with our sympathies because losing their kid is worse punishment than prison?

When your negligence causes the death of someone else, we don't, as a society, say 'Well he'll just have to live with the guilt, and that's the worst punishment of all.' Feeling guilty doesn't erase criminal culpability, and I'm damn sure that not being in prison is a lot more enjoyable than being in prison.
2013-09-12 11:06:48 PM
4 votes:

Lollipop165: monoski: R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?

This

If she didn't sue the zoo, I would say let her go without charges. Its a tragedy enough, and obviously a stupid (really, really really stupid) mistake. Taking personal responsibility for killing your own child is punishment enough.

But now that's she's trying to shift blame onto the zoo... I saw make her pay. She's obviously learned nothing.


You know, I suspect that you could press charges, set a very low bail so she's out in a day or two, and then sentence her to time served. For someone so adamantly in denial of their responsibility here, a legal judgment that this was your fault is probably a worse punishment than any sentence you could possibly impose anyway.
2013-09-12 03:56:40 PM
4 votes:
grimlock1972: They would have to prove she deliberately dropped the kid and that is not an easy thing to do.

You do know that "murder" isn't the only thing on the table, right? Child endangerment, for one. I'm pretty sure dropping your kid into a pit of meat-eating teddy bears counts as "danger."

I think she wasn't charged for the same reason 90-year olds who go the wrong way on freeways are also not charged. They figure the experience is traumatic enough, pat them on the head and send them on their way.

/I don't agree with that notion. Throw the book at her, especially now that she's digging for gold.
2013-09-12 03:45:54 PM
4 votes:

grimlock1972: R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?

They would have to prove she deliberately dropped the kid and that is not an easy thing to do.


Even for endangering a child? Lifting them over the friggin railing and dropping them is negligent
2013-09-12 03:45:35 PM
4 votes:

monoski: R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?

This


If she didn't sue the zoo, I would say let her go without charges. Its a tragedy enough, and obviously a stupid (really, really really stupid) mistake. Taking personal responsibility for killing your own child is punishment enough.

But now that's she's trying to shift blame onto the zoo... I saw make her pay. She's obviously learned nothing.
2013-09-12 03:41:21 PM
4 votes:

Magorn: It's simply MONSTROUS  that instead of fesing up to thie rmisdeed and abjectly apologizing with a 7 figure check, the Zoo has the copper-plated GALL to suggest MOM is somehow the one at fault here....


This is so common it amazes me. I run a rental building and during showings bring people to the roofdeck to let them see it. All the time, mom or dad will lift 3 year old Ayden over the brick railing for a better view. Or my personal favorite, when adults allow their toddlers to run around willy nilly in the dog run and let them pull the dog's ears. Cause you know, when the kid gets bit its the DOG'S fault, amiright?
2013-09-12 03:33:56 PM
4 votes:
Why is this mother not on trial for child endangerment at the least?  You dropped your baby into a pit of wild animals you crazy biatch.  Kill yourself.
2013-09-13 06:58:59 AM
3 votes:

FnkyTwn: This mother is probably going through a lot of grief, and I'll bet that she didn't reach out to find a lawyer. I'll bet that every lawyer in her state rushed to "help" her in her time of need. It's a tragic story, but at this point i'm going to have to give her a pass and instead blame the bloodsucking lawyers.

CSB: A city bus crunched the front end of our minivan while my wife was driving. She was fine. 6 cops showed up and everybody agrees that the bus driver was completely 100% at fault (my wife was stopped at a red light). Within two days we got these amazing lawyer packets in the mail from all over our state. Not just the 'we'll represent you' crap a person in an accident normally gets, but we got DVDs and expensive-ass paper and hand written notes. Because "city bus" equals money.

Eventually we got sued by two different people on the bus (because they got nice packets in the mail too). Seriously. Everything worked out just fine in the end though, and the city covered the cost of our repairs + rental car for the week. We had zero interest in suing (If she had been hurt or ended up with PTSD, then it would be a different story), but I could see how somebody, in their darkest moment of grief at not only losing their child, but also probably watching that horrific event happen.. I could see how a lawyer could take advantage of that. I could see the mother wanting to share in that responsibility.

Kill all the lawyers.


Seriously?  This lunatic dropped her baby into a den of wild animals and you're blaming...the lawyers?  She SHOULD be experiencing a lot of grief.  She killed another human being through gross and willful negligence. She should also be behind bars.

A mother causing the death of her own child should be held accountable to a greater degree not lesser.  I can't possible imagine a greater breach of trust and responsibility.
2013-09-12 10:03:51 PM
3 votes:
I did a college internship at a zoo and wow, parents. In 8 weeks I amassed many idiotic farking parent stories but here are the two that stand out the most. We had several mountain lions that loved to play ambush with patrons (hide just under the window and pop up or jump down from a tree) and one particular woman with a stroller stood there and took pictures while two hungry-looking mountain lions gazed at the stroller (and the tasty snack inside) for several minutes. I stood there kind of in awe until she looked at me and said "isn't it great they know it's a baby and are watching over it?" at which point I had given up on caring and said "yes they know it's a baby, but they are watching it because it is a tender snack". She huffed and strollered on.

The best one is similar to the article. A man put his toddler on the top of a wall over an alligator enclosure. Seven adult alligators were in the pit below. I looked at the man and said "sir, what you are doing is incredibly unsafe and you need take your child off the wall" he looked at me with dull, insulted eyes and said "well if he falls in you'll get him" to which I replied "no, if he falls in he will be dead before he hits the water". He seriously thought that the alligators wouldn't bother his most likely injured and screaming child and that I could (or would) get in there and safe his little crotchfruit in before he ended up like Mola Ram.
2013-09-12 10:00:32 PM
3 votes:

groppet: She must be related to the two dumb dumbs that used that slingshot on a tiger at that zoo in San Francisco last year.


I do like how the tiger tracked down those specific assholes while ignoring tons of other people though.

Protip: Don't shiat around with one of the most perfect predators evolution has ever come up with. It will fark you up.

\Yes, I have more sympathy for the Tiger in that one.
2013-09-12 05:24:13 PM
3 votes:
Easy Money:

1. Pump out a crotch fruit.
2. Go to a zoo.
3. "Accidentally" get the kid killed by the animals.
4. Cry and mourn and blame the zoo.
5. Win the public's emotions.
6. Sue the zoo "so that this tragedy will never happen again to another family".
7. Profit from the degeneration of personal responsibility's importance in America.
2013-09-12 04:13:17 PM
3 votes:
fark her and her spurious lawsuit.

The zoo should charge her for the cost of one painted dog plus cleaning fees. Maybe a bit more for a vet visit in case any of their animals got indigestion from eating her boy. (Painted dogs are only allowed one treat a day, and only if they ate all their painted dog food.)
2013-09-12 04:13:01 PM
3 votes:
It's about time companies and businesses started standing up for themselves against the dumb people of this world.
2013-09-12 04:05:27 PM
3 votes:

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Normally I'd agree that blaming a parent for a death in the midst of a lawsuit is scummy, but it appears warranted in this case.

Why the fark do people not understand that safety warnings apply to them, too? It's not like a speed limit or some stupid rule that is annoying and seemingly designed only to give govt entities an excuse to fine you.

It's an actual safety measure designed to keep you from dying. Why the fark do people ignore shiat like that? So the kid can get a better look at a bunch of dogs?

I feel certain she'll be blaming herself for his death until she herself dies. And she should. Because it is her fault, if the situation is as the story describes.

I've seen people prop their very young children on the railing at the zoo. Idiots.


It seems odd, but the more you regulate and legislate the more this will happen.  People who are very stupid or naive reason that since everything has a rule attached and they've never been harmed by breaking the rules, this time will be safe too.  An intelligent or wise person can make the distinction between a rule that has minor consequences (traffic fines) and one that can be deadly (dangling your child over hungry wild animals).  Morons will just continue to push the envelope since that could "never happen to them".  Usually this comes from being coddled and sheltered, though eating lead paint chips as a kids could have an influence.

"Hey y'all!  Watch this!"
2013-09-12 03:57:11 PM
3 votes:
If she gave a shiat about the kid, she would have jumped in and fought the dogs to her last breath. She may have even done that shiat on purpose. It would an easy way to turn a unwanted kid into a million bucks. She should charged with manslaughter, or at least reckless endangerment of a child.
2013-09-12 03:48:14 PM
3 votes:

Lollipop165: Magorn: It's simply MONSTROUS  that instead of fesing up to thie rmisdeed and abjectly apologizing with a 7 figure check, the Zoo has the copper-plated GALL to suggest MOM is somehow the one at fault here....

This is so common it amazes me. I run a rental building and during showings bring people to the roofdeck to let them see it. All the time, mom or dad will lift 3 year old Ayden over the brick railing for a better view. Or my personal favorite, when adults allow their toddlers to run around willy nilly in the dog run and let them pull the dog's ears. Cause you know, when the kid gets bit its the DOG'S fault, amiright?


They've wrapped their world in foam and have assumed everybody else has done the same. It all comes back to that false sense of parental entitlement. The world is supposed to cater to them now because they made a baby.
2013-09-12 03:44:50 PM
3 votes:
Darwinism by proxy.

Stupid woman reproduces and then does something stupid resulting in the death of her little snowflake. Stupid genes removed from gene pool, all's well. It's a shame though that the woman didn't jump in after the kid and get mauled to death herself. That would have been hilarious.

/yes, a window seat will be fine thanks.
2013-09-12 03:36:14 PM
3 votes:
I did feel bad for her, but not anymore.  She did something incredibly stupid with her kid, and while we all do it to some degree, her mistake had tragic consequences.  Instead of learning from that, she's obviously ignored the incredible guilt she feels because if I were her, there would have been no way on god's green earth that I wouldn't have plunged down into that pit to die with my son as well after doing something so so SOOOOO stupid.

Amazingly, I've taken both of my kids to that zoo, and neither one has been mauled to death by animals.  Guess we're just anomalies.
2013-09-13 12:22:07 PM
2 votes:

FnkyTwn: You should look at the images of where this kid fell from.


I've actually been where this kid fell from. Numerous times.

She stood her kid on the railing over the exhibit. If you want to hold a 2 year-old up so they can see over it, it is possible to stand about 2 feet from the railing, and hold them against your chest, so that they can see but can't fall in. In fact, sensible people do that all the time.

FnkyTwn: There were lots of people around, and nobody saw her 'dangle' him.. so i'm inclined to believe her version.


Her version of events differs from the version of events that the police investigation revealed when the actual incident occurred. Specifically she is now denying that she stood the boy on the railing, although after the police investigated and interviewed witnesses:

"Almost immediately after that he lost his balance, fell down off the railing into the actual pit and he was immediately attacked by 11 dogs,"  Lt. Kraus said.

Nobody in Nov. 2012 was denying that she put him on the railing. Her sister even said she understands why the mother put him on the railing, and it was because he wore glasses. He was in a standing position and lost his balance. The railing is slanted at 45 degrees toward the viewing platform:

d4493f2df0d1b95cfc62-773cd17a86049dd672fafb96394debed.r5.cf2.rackcdn.com

She stood him on that railing and he fell in. That is entirely her fault.
2013-09-13 01:12:21 AM
2 votes:
This mother is probably going through a lot of grief, and I'll bet that she didn't reach out to find a lawyer. I'll bet that every lawyer in her state rushed to "help" her in her time of need. It's a tragic story, but at this point i'm going to have to give her a pass and instead blame the bloodsucking lawyers.

CSB: A city bus crunched the front end of our minivan while my wife was driving. She was fine. 6 cops showed up and everybody agrees that the bus driver was completely 100% at fault (my wife was stopped at a red light). Within two days we got these amazing lawyer packets in the mail from all over our state. Not just the 'we'll represent you' crap a person in an accident normally gets, but we got DVDs and expensive-ass paper and hand written notes. Because "city bus" equals money.

Eventually we got sued by two different people on the bus (because they got nice packets in the mail too). Seriously. Everything worked out just fine in the end though, and the city covered the cost of our repairs + rental car for the week. We had zero interest in suing (If she had been hurt or ended up with PTSD, then it would be a different story), but I could see how somebody, in their darkest moment of grief at not only losing their child, but also probably watching that horrific event happen.. I could see how a lawyer could take advantage of that. I could see the mother wanting to share in that responsibility.

Kill all the lawyers.
2013-09-12 11:31:58 PM
2 votes:

Headso: the article says the lawyers for the defense say the woman lifted the kid over the rail, the woman says the kid wiggled out of her grasp when she went to pick him up and he fell over the railing. farkers have deemed this woman a liar and the lawyers as telling the truth, really if we can't trust lawyers who can we trust...


have you looked at the rail? She would have to be holding him awfully high and awfully close to the rail. I have a 2 year old and I pick her up to look at stuff at the zoo. But I don't hold her whole body over the height if the railing and farking lean over.

Because that would be retarded.

If she gets held up that means her head pokes over the rail while the rest of her body is below it. It means we are usually back a foot or two. Often she just has to look through the rail. I get that this kid had a vision problem, but maybe its time to think about appropriate activities for your disabled toddler rather than throw them to a pack of wild dogs.

Frankly the MOST disturbing thing is she didn't jump in there. I would not have effing thought twice about it. I probably would have been jumping in before she even hit the ground.
2013-09-12 11:02:12 PM
2 votes:

Headso: the article says the lawyers for the defense say the woman lifted the kid over the rail, the woman says the kid wiggled out of her grasp when she went to pick him up and he fell over the railing. farkers have deemed this woman a liar and the lawyers as telling the truth, really if we can't trust lawyers who can we trust...


1) The two are not mutually exclusive
2) It's still not the zoo's fault
2013-09-12 07:19:38 PM
2 votes:
Needs more signs like the Sydney Aquarium Croc exhibit...

evolution-control.com
2013-09-12 06:02:00 PM
2 votes:

NotARocketScientist: The zoo should put up a sign that says "Do Not Drop Your Children into Animal Enclosures" so that people like her are fully warned.


...

if only such a sign existed... wait - what?

imageshack.com

/needs to say "do not feed our animals with your children"
2013-09-12 05:29:37 PM
2 votes:
www.gamechangers.com

Damn thats a pretty dog. Shame that if you bread them for tameness, they would probably lose their marking like those foxes in Russia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox
2013-09-12 04:58:51 PM
2 votes:

Evil High Priest: Wingchild: fark her and her spurious lawsuit.

The zoo should charge her for the cost of one painted dog plus cleaning fees. Maybe a bit more for a vet visit in case any of their animals got indigestion from eating her boy. (Painted dogs are only allowed one treat a day, and only if they ate all their painted dog food.)

Throw in some 'pain and mental anguish' for the other dogs who witnessed the whole thing.


How about "pain and mental anguish" for the poor zookeeper who had to remove a half-eaten toddler corpse from the enclosure.  Blech...
2013-09-12 04:33:22 PM
2 votes:

mike_d85: Lollipop165: This is so common it amazes me. I run a rental building and during showings bring people to the roofdeck to let them see it. All the time, mom or dad will lift 3 year old Ayden over the brick railing for a better view. Or my personal favorite, when adults allow their toddlers to run around willy nilly in the dog run and let them pull the dog's ears. Cause you know, when the kid gets bit its the DOG'S fault, amiright?

Legally, yes.  And it pisses me off.  As far as I know no one has ever been able to sucessfully beat a "viscious dog" charge when someone decides that a dog biting them is a sign something is wrong with the dog.  I've lost dogs this way, so have plenty of other farkers.  People will illicit a bite from a dog and will take revenge on the animal for their ignorance of animal behavior.  Some people simply refuse to accept that animals respond differently and give different warnings than human beings.  It's as though they expect a dog st rear up on it's hind legs and say "I say, good fellow, if you continue in this behavior I shall be coerced into using force upon you" before biting.  I have never, and will never, believe a dog bit someone "without warning".  There is always warning, it may be barking, it may be growling, it may be ears pinned back, it may be flicking eyes back and forth (that's a real thing), it may be snapping, it may be sticking their tounge between their teeth (again, that's a thing), but there was SOME warning.


This.

I was dropping a letter into an office in a builders yard for my boss in May, and the gate was locked as it was early. So I hopped the gate and walked around the piles of timber to the office. Where his guard Alsatian was sleeping. The dog did it's very best to let me know it didn't want a fight (although I don't know why, it was 3 metres tall at the shoulder and had teeth like knives...I think). Lots of snarling, barking, ears pinned back, etc.

For my part, I did my best to let it know I was hoping for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict. Eyes down, slowly walking backwards. What I can't understand is people not telling their kids how to deal with aggressive dogs. If you don't want them to drown, teach them to swim. If you don't want them to get bitten, teach them not to run screaming with their arms flailing. It doesn't usually help.

/Yes, I should have guessed it was guarded, but it was early and I hadn't had my coffee.
//There is always a warning. Dogs don't actually want to fight you. That shiat's dangerous , yo.
2013-09-12 04:05:40 PM
2 votes:
Morsel. HAHAHAHA!!

Really though, being a dad, this farking crushes me. He trusted his mommy, and I'm sure his last thought as he was being torn to shreds and in agonizing pain was "Mommy will fix this".
2013-09-12 03:59:55 PM
2 votes:

neversubmit: Bull Dogshiat! She threw her kid in for a fat check.

[assets.nydailynews.com image 635x403]

A small net is seen stretched out under the observation deck's viewing area. It was meant to catch items like cellphones and sunglasses, but Maddox bounced off it and into the pit according to the family.

I didn't see anything in the story about witnesses


We need to Mythbusters that shiat and drop a 2 year old on it and see if it bounces off.
2013-09-12 03:57:17 PM
2 votes:
Bull Dogshiat! She threw her kid in for a fat check.

assets.nydailynews.com

A small net is seen stretched out under the observation deck's viewing area. It was meant to catch items like cellphones and sunglasses, but Maddox bounced off it and into the pit according to the family.

I didn't see anything in the story about witnesses
2013-09-12 03:55:04 PM
2 votes:

vudukungfu: R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?

Should have pressed them immediately  but this is shiatsberg, so you're dealing with a mass population of retards, corrupt pigs, and a court system designed to give a cheap squeak to anyone who isn't black.


You sound like a fun person without any issues.
2013-09-12 03:54:03 PM
2 votes:
Maddox died Nov. 4

blog.cassiopeia.ca

A firetruck came to rescue him but it looked like this
2013-09-12 03:53:59 PM
2 votes:
There's just so much about this story that I cannot understand.  Firstly, how anyone could be stupid enough to hold their baby over a pit of wild animals, and secondly, how you could drop your baby into a pit of wild animals and not immediately jump in after him to try and protect him until help arrived.  To drop your baby, and then just stand up there and do nothing to try and help, is just farking incomprehensible to me.
2013-09-12 03:52:55 PM
2 votes:

R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?


Criminal negligence or involuntary manslaughter? Hmmm.

You're right though. She should be held accountable and her attorney should face some discipline for even entertaining the idea of suing.
2013-09-12 03:48:27 PM
2 votes:
this is like the mom dropping her kid off the roof of a tall building. then blaming the city and the building for the kid hitting the sidewalk.you know, because they own the sidewalk.. pretty damn dumb..

/it is tragic though
2013-09-12 03:36:09 PM
2 votes:

R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?


That's cute.  Everyone knows only fathers can be guilty of gross negligence and neglect.
2013-09-12 03:34:00 PM
2 votes:
At least the lawyer didn't accuse her of trying to profit from the kids death.  I'd say he showed pretty good restraint on that part.
2013-09-12 03:31:49 PM
2 votes:

Ennuipoet: This is the America we've created.

Let's start putting lawyers  parents over the railings.



ftfm.
2013-09-12 03:30:52 PM
2 votes:

Mitch Taylor's Bro: scottydoesntknow: Robert Mongeluzzi, who represents the Derkosh family, called the zoo's conduct "unconscionable."

"I think blaming the mother is unwarranted and wrong especially given that they were warned by their own employees of that very conduct," he said. "I think their attack on the Derkosh family is awful."

Telling the truth is NOT an attack. God forbid she actually owns up to her actions.

There's no money in personal accountability.


CORRECTION:
There's no money in TAKING personal accountability.

/there's bail bonding, repossession services, eviction services, pawn brokering, paycheck loans, title loans, etc, etc, etc
2013-09-12 03:14:16 PM
2 votes:

wee: scottydoesntknow: God forbid she actually owns up to her actions.

This is a woman who named her son "Maddox".  She probably already had a school picked out for the two year old.


maybe she wasn't careless when she held the kid over the railing. maybe the kid jumped becasue his mom named him Maddox. I guess it's still her fault though.
2013-09-12 02:48:32 PM
2 votes:

TheDumbBlonde: "A dingo ate my baby!".


I was visiting Australia around the time after Azaria Chamberlain's death by dingo and was amazed the Australians all assumed she and her husband killed the baby. The general public there just couldn't seem to believe a wild dingo could take a nine-week-old baby and eat it. The jokes they made were dark and funny though.

As I'm from Florida, a baby getting killed and eaten by a wild animal isn't unknown. Seemed like the Australian media whipped the public up into a frenzy that the parents killed their baby, instead of believing the more logical cause.

Glad our American media doesn't do the same thing here, mates.
2013-09-12 02:44:04 PM
2 votes:
I was almost frantic with concern when I saw this thread go more than 10 minutes without a dingo comment. I was beginning to question everything I know about Fark, whether I had somehow shifted into some alternate reality where nothing made sense anymore, whether everything I had once believed in was dead, gone, destroyed. Thankyou, TheDumbBlonde, for restoring my faith.
2013-09-12 02:34:54 PM
2 votes:
"A dingo ate my baby!".
2013-09-13 10:37:29 AM
1 votes:

capt.hollister: No, there is a difference. There is no reason to think that she didn't love her son and intended to kill him. His death was the result of a stupid, inconsiderate gesture. No malice was involved. Stupidity, negligence, yes, but not malice. You can certainly accuse her of reckless endangerment causing death and jail her for it, but do not make the mistake of thinking that this would be worst than having lost her small child.


So then she's pretty much just like the people who prayed instead of getting medical care for their diabetic child?

Well, except that those people actually thought the prayer was helping, and there's no rational basis whatsoever for thinking that holding your kid over a pen of wild animals is a beneficial move.
2013-09-13 06:35:14 AM
1 votes:

Tatterdemalian: Just like those poor Menendez boys, shown leniency by the court because they were orphans in the cold hard world after they murdered their parents.


You don't think that happens? Here's an example:

grimlock1972: True true, but in anyway its a sticky situation. I wholeheartedly she should be charged with something, but no matter what punishment she might be given it would pale in comparison to having to live with the knowledge her stupidity cost the life of her child.


I think she should be jailed for the negligent manslaughter of her kid. And no, the fact that he's dead is not more punishment than her being in prison.
2013-09-12 10:22:10 PM
1 votes:
If she had dangled her son over an empty 11-foot drop and he fell, hit his head and died, this biatch would had never dared to sue anyone. But throw a zoo into the equation and she and the lawyers smell money.
2013-09-12 09:58:40 PM
1 votes:

mike_d85: darth_badger: I wonder what the animals poop looked like?

At least one of them had glasses, so it probably felt like one of those portraits that stare at you.


That poor dog.  Can you imagine the pain of passing a pair of spectacles through your bowels?
2013-09-12 09:51:11 PM
1 votes:

mike_d85: The_Original_Roxtar: the morsel in question
[www.wtae.com image 640x480]

Did... did they really provide the news a picture of them allowing him to play with heavy equipment?

I realize the possibility that he was perfectly safe in that situation (keys removed, trained operater supervising, etc.), but that is a toddler with it's hands on the controls of what appears to be a bulldozer.  Given the circumstances of the child's death, it may have not been the brightest move on their part.


Could be a museum. Pretty sure there are photos of me in a cab like that at a similar age from a visit somewhere, the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago IIRC.
2013-09-12 09:08:07 PM
1 votes:
Is it too  late to toss her in also?
2013-09-12 08:41:22 PM
1 votes:

AirForceVet: TheDumbBlonde: "A dingo ate my baby!".

I was visiting Australia around the time after Azaria Chamberlain's death by dingo and was amazed the Australians all assumed she and her husband killed the baby. The general public there just couldn't seem to believe a wild dingo could take a nine-week-old baby and eat it. The jokes they made were dark and funny though.

As I'm from Florida, a baby getting killed and eaten by a wild animal isn't unknown. Seemed like the Australian media whipped the public up into a frenzy that the parents killed their baby, instead of believing the more logical cause.

Glad our American media doesn't do the same thing here, mates.


Australians are the same people that are convinced that the couple left behind by the dive boat staged the whole thing.

/I blame Murdoch
//and the constant fear of death from spiders.
2013-09-12 07:13:30 PM
1 votes:

onzmadi: It is people like this waste of oxygen that  we lose things like zoos. Its tragic the boy? died but using this as an opportunity for a payday is just beyond awful. I hope the mother gets Lou Gehrig's disease.


Not cool. That insults my husband who died of it
2013-09-12 07:03:18 PM
1 votes:

TheDumbBlonde: People that name their children other people's surnames deserve to have their babies eaten by dingos.


 One of Angelina Jolie's trendy accessory kids is named Maddox.  I wouldn't be surprised if that's where she got the name from.
2013-09-12 06:27:37 PM
1 votes:

gaslight: Dumb question: why wasn't this person arrested for endangerment causing death?


Because the typical response in a situation like this is to say that the poor, mournful mother has suffered enough by the punishment of having to grieve over her dead child.
2013-09-12 06:27:19 PM
1 votes:
I hope the zoo doesn't settle. She deserves nothing. She got her child killed by wild dogs. I don't think she should necessarily go to jail, but she doesn't deserve a dime from the zoo. fark her.
2013-09-12 05:58:18 PM
1 votes:
She must be related to the two dumb dumbs that used that slingshot on a tiger at that zoo in San Francisco last year.
2013-09-12 05:27:58 PM
1 votes:
Not sure if this has been mentioned but this is some biased pandering scumbag journalism too. Notice the wording of the title of the article. "...zoo blames mother for boy's fatal mauling." Not "mother is suing zoo for son's death, etc".
2013-09-12 05:21:32 PM
1 votes:

BiffSpiffy: R.A.Danny: How is this father not punching that asshole of a mother's face inside out?

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x614]

Is that guy with the beard PS in?  The look on his face is the only non-idiot face.  He looks like he just walked into the wrong funeral.

Also, if this was an only child, the father has a chance for a clean break from the idiot wife/former mother.


I'd be booted out of the courtroom at the divorce hearing for referring to her as "That Stupid Coont".

Every filing would use that as her name.
2013-09-12 05:13:33 PM
1 votes:

The_Original_Roxtar: the morsel in question


Oh Mr Maddox Magoo, you've done it again!!
2013-09-12 05:09:24 PM
1 votes:
Step 1.  Run up credit card debt

Step 2.  Realize kids a expensive

Step 3.  "Drop" kid into enclosure

Step 4.  PROFIT!!!!!
2013-09-12 05:05:47 PM
1 votes:

R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?


That's the missing piece. Child endangerment. She should be charged with that crime. Or at least dingo fishing without a license.
2013-09-12 05:05:44 PM
1 votes:

jshine: Guns n' Farkin Roses: I don't want to come off all "Internet Tough Guy" but how does she or someone else not jump in right away and start wrecking shop on these dogs until help comes?  At least pickup the kid and start screaming at them hysterically, maybe kick a few of them in the gunt.

Depending on the drop, the fall might have incapacitated her immediately, in which case the gesture would have accomplished exactly nothing.  Fighting dogs is one thing -- maybe heroic -- but fighting gravity is just plain dumb.


And remember the 45 degree railing that would have made it very difficult to get over and into the cage.  Well, unless someone would have helped her over the way she did for her kid.
2013-09-12 05:04:16 PM
1 votes:
This is totally unacceptable.  I don't know what the zoo was thinking, with safety standards so lax.  A railing and a moat, sure, but where's the obvious incentive to stay behind those clearly-crossable barriers?  The zoo should have done more.  Something like, say, keeping dangerous animals on the other side of that railing, so that nobody with any good sense would risk falling over it, out of fear of the dangerous animals.

Why this wasn't thought of, I have no idea.
2013-09-12 04:59:38 PM
1 votes:

The_Original_Roxtar: the morsel in question
[www.wtae.com image 640x480]


I've seen that kid before - he worked as a model for The Far Side cartoons!

The zoo should put up a sign that says "Do Not Drop Your Children into Animal Enclosures" so that people like her are fully warned.
2013-09-12 04:52:06 PM
1 votes:

AirForceVet: TheDumbBlonde: "A dingo ate my baby!".

I was visiting Australia around the time after Azaria Chamberlain's death by dingo and was amazed the Australians all assumed she and her husband killed the baby. The general public there just couldn't seem to believe a wild dingo could take a nine-week-old baby and eat it. The jokes they made were dark and funny though.

As I'm from Florida, a baby getting killed and eaten by a wild animal isn't unknown. Seemed like the Australian media whipped the public up into a frenzy that the parents killed their baby, instead of believing the more logical cause.

Glad our American media doesn't do the same thing here, mates.


lh3.ggpht.com
"You're damned right. We only whip them up into a frenzy when we know good and well that they are guilty guilty guilty"
2013-09-12 04:50:22 PM
1 votes:

Wingchild: fark her and her spurious lawsuit.

The zoo should charge her for the cost of one painted dog plus cleaning fees. Maybe a bit more for a vet visit in case any of their animals got indigestion from eating her boy. (Painted dogs are only allowed one treat a day, and only if they ate all their painted dog food.)


Throw in some 'pain and mental anguish' for the other dogs who witnessed the whole thing.
2013-09-12 04:50:13 PM
1 votes:
Fun Fact:

In my previous career, I had interactions with Bob Mongeluzzi, of the Saltz & Mongeluzzi lawfirm. They did a lot of business with my former employer.

As they are now my *former* employer, I can say, without hesitation, that Bob Mongeluzzi was one of the scummiest lawyers I ever had the displeasure to do business with. Dude was everything that is wrong with the modern legal system. I hated working for his firm. Always felt dirty after a Saltz/Mongeluzzi case. Problem was, they were one of my former employer's top clients, so they always got their asses kissed and their cases put on high priority.

/CSB?
2013-09-12 04:47:57 PM
1 votes:

R.A.Danny: How is this father not punching that asshole of a mother's face inside out?

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x614]


I'd love to do it for him.
2013-09-12 04:45:56 PM
1 votes:
How is this father not punching that asshole of a mother's face inside out?

i.dailymail.co.uk
2013-09-12 04:44:09 PM
1 votes:

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Why the fark do people not understand that safety warnings apply to them, too? It's not like a speed limit or some stupid rule that is annoying and seemingly designed only to give govt entities an excuse to fine you.

It's an actual safety measure designed to keep you from dying. 

I've seen people prop their very young children on the railing at the zoo. Idiots.


You know how many people are killed in zoos every year? You know how many are killed in auto collisions every year? Idiots.
2013-09-12 04:43:05 PM
1 votes:
That kid was a cutie. I would have been happy to take him home and get him a BB gun.
2013-09-12 04:41:50 PM
1 votes:

Matthew Keene: Separated at birth...

[screen.tezini.com image 620x350]
[a.abcnews.go.com image 320x240]


Ralphie wanted a gun.  All little Maddox wanted was a puppy.
2013-09-12 04:41:03 PM
1 votes:
Wow, that is just farking horrible. She basically threw her kid to a pack of wild dogs. And so of course she sues. Possibly a cash grab, possibly to avoid being thrown in jail for killing her kid, or possibly just grief-stricken and/or stupid.

What kind of lawyer would take that case? Seriously, suing a zoo after the mother dropped her kid into the enclosure? I would just back out of the room slowly saying "thanks, but no".
2013-09-12 04:38:04 PM
1 votes:

Molavian: Why didn't she jump in after him?  If I dropped my kid I'd be following him.


I was wondering this.  If my children were faced with any present mortal danger, nothing would stand in my way.
2013-09-12 04:35:50 PM
1 votes:

stonicus: But seriously... a 45 degree tilted railing... she'd have to hold that kid so far over and out for him to get a better look... I'm surprised one of the other zoo attendees didn't slap her yelling "WTF you doing with that kid biatch?!?!"


I can't find it now, but somewhere back when this happened a person claiming to have been a witness said that she put the kid on the railing and then turned around to get a camera out of the stroller before he fell.
2013-09-12 04:20:34 PM
1 votes:

R.A.Danny: Morsel. HAHAHAHA!!

Really though, being a dad, this farking crushes me. He trusted his mommy, and I'm sure his last thought as he was being torn to shreds and in agonizing pain was "Mommy will fix this".


...oh, that's OK, I really wanted to stay awake with my thoughts tonight.
2013-09-12 04:19:01 PM
1 votes:

mike_d85: Legally, yes.  And it pisses me off.


At my dog run, people will tell the kids to leave and more often than not talk shiat to the parents who let the kids in in the first place. I don't blame them at all and do this myself. ALL THE TIME the parents act like WE are the ones being jerks. How these people can't understand that CHILDREN and DOG RUNS do not mix I have no clue.
2013-09-12 04:15:11 PM
1 votes:

grimlock1972: R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?

They would have to prove she deliberately dropped the kid and that is not an easy thing to do.


That would only be true if she was suspected of murder. No one is suspecting her of murder, but she nonetheless recklessly endangered him when she lifted him over the railing.
2013-09-12 04:14:24 PM
1 votes:

The_Original_Roxtar: zoo should counter-sue for the cost of replacing the endangered animal they had to shoot in attempting to save the kid.


The entire exhibit is gone. At least they didn't kill the other dogs, but man, I used to really like that exhibit.

Pittsburgh Zoo's enclosures for the animals are mostly railing-and-moat type enclosures. Very few of them are actually cages. The zoo is set up for awesome visibility of the animals and giving them space to live comfortably. I really think this woman is just a negligent idiot who didn't take a farking thing about the fact that these are wild animals seriously, and her stupidity caused her kid's death.

This lawsuit is just her way of avoiding the fact that she, and she alone, is responsible for what happened.
2013-09-12 04:08:13 PM
1 votes:
Take the animals out of the equation, it should still be obvious that hoisting your son over a cliffside railing and then dropping him isn't really a safe thing to do.
2013-09-12 04:02:32 PM
1 votes:
Maybe I'm awful, but I love that we get stories like this every year or so.  It restores my faith in Darwin, in fact, I think it's the main reason why we should keep predators in zoos, to thin idiots from the herd.
2013-09-12 04:01:14 PM
1 votes:
Her toss of Maddox into the enclosure was a weak, pitiful effort. I could have hurled that kid at least 20 or 25 feet into the enclosure.
2013-09-12 03:53:25 PM
1 votes:

bborchar: grimlock1972: R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?

They would have to prove she deliberately dropped the kid and that is not an easy thing to do.

It doesn't have to be murder.  There are other charges such as child endangerment and even criminally negligent homocide.


Reckless endangerment spring quickly to mind as a slam-dunk in this case.  I figure the non-chares are a case of the prosecutors figuring that she's been punished enough for her stupidity and that jail isn't going to do anyone any good.
2013-09-12 03:52:26 PM
1 votes:
24.media.tumblr.com
2013-09-12 03:50:57 PM
1 votes:

Ennuipoet: This is the America we've created.

Let's start putting parents over the railings.


Sometimes you just have to go with the America that you have instead of the America that you wish you had.

/we really do need to fill up the 'B' Ark soon and launch it
2013-09-12 03:42:25 PM
1 votes:

R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?


This
2013-09-12 03:40:30 PM
1 votes:

R.A.Danny: Why haven't charges been pressed against the mother?


They would have to prove she deliberately dropped the kid and that is not an easy thing to do.
2013-09-12 03:34:54 PM
1 votes:
I guess she proved late term abortions are possible without a jail term.
2013-09-12 03:32:36 PM
1 votes:

AirForceVet: TheDumbBlonde: "A dingo ate my baby!".

I was visiting Australia around the time after Azaria Chamberlain's death by dingo and was amazed the Australians all assumed she and her husband killed the baby. The general public there just couldn't seem to believe a wild dingo could take a nine-week-old baby and eat it. The jokes they made were dark and funny though.

As I'm from Florida, a baby getting killed and eaten by a wild animal isn't unknown. Seemed like the Australian media whipped the public up into a frenzy that the parents killed their baby, instead of believing the more logical cause.

Glad our American media doesn't do the same thing here, mates.


Seems like that's backwards.  I'd assume many more kids are killed by their parents, either overtly or through neglect or accident, than are eaten by wild animals.
wee [TotalFark]
2013-09-12 03:06:59 PM
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: God forbid she actually owns up to her actions.


This is a woman who named her son "Maddox".  She probably already had a school picked out for the two year old.
 
Displayed 102 of 102 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report