Update on the Gorilla murder story: ZOO WITNESS SAYS GORILLA WAS 'PROTECTING' CHILD

[Feeling the Bern]

A witness present at the Cincinnati Zoo says the 450-pound gorilla that was shot and killed after a 4-year-old boy fell into his enclosure was not "hurting" the boy, but instead seemed to be "protecting him."

"The little boy, once he fell, I don't think the gorilla even knew that he was in there until he heard him splashing in the water," Brittany Nicely told ABC News on Sunday, explaining that zoogoers' screams drew more attention to the Saturday afternoon incident.

"The gorilla rushed the boy, but did not hit the boy," Nicely said. "He almost was guarding the boy, was protecting him."

Video obtained by ABC News shows the gorilla dragging the small boy through the water in the enclosure, and the zoo said that the fire department reported that "the gorilla was violently dragging and throwing the child."

So the Gorilla was murdered.

[Trust Buster]

1. An irresponsible parent created the problem. Criticizing the first responders is silly IMO.

[Bucky]

5. Yeah, but shooting the mom wasn't really an option.

I'm sure the first responder was thinking about Travis the chimp.

[nolabear]

2. It was the absolute worst decision to have to make.

Sometimes there's no good solution. I worked in an animal sanctuary long ago and though we loved and respected our charges deeply, sometimes there is just no good solution.

[cali]

15. +1

[Bucky]

3. Did they not have tranqs on hand? (edited response)

I wonder if open carrying a tranq rifle is covered by the 2nd Amendment.

What a horrible shame.

(on edit) Tranquilizers take a couple of minutes to affect a 400 lb critter, apparently. I see it was handled the best way possible.

Tranquing the mom would still, I suppose, have been wrong.

[cali]

4. Sorry, I'll leave it up to the zoo folks.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

6. Still pushing the "murder" lie?

Nice try

[2naSalit]

7. Zoos are a disgrace

protected under the guise of learning and understanding. we humans really need to rethink our role on this planet and recognize that we are not here to "save the planet". I suspect that we are here to destroy it.

[EL34x4]

21. As bad as zoos are,

I suppose they're better than being killed by poachers. Gorillas aren't exactly doing great in their natural habitat.

[pintobean]

8. Calling it murder makes me have no respect for your opinion.

It was a very difficult decision. I understand people disagreeing with it, but calling it murder is ridiculous.

[CincyDem]

9. And in an alternate universe...

...4-year old child sneaks into gorilla enclosure. Trained specialists, some with decades of experience virtually living with these animals daily, view the situation and determine that the only solution is the put Harambe down rather than being sedated.

Local hair dresser with no primate behavioral expertise jumps into the conversation and yells "wait wait, I think he's protecting the child".

Suddenly, the trained specialists look at each other and say..."hey, she's right. I never thought of that. Let's back off and hit him with a sedative dart. That should be good.". Then they turn to said hair stylist and say "Gosh, we're glad you're here...we would have killed Harambe without you".

So they plug him with the sedative and his immediate reaction is to start thrashing around, pounding the child on a rock like Judge Judy with her gavel on a bad day...all captured on video by a dozen other experts (aka zoo visitors) in the gallery. Eventually, after 4-5 minutes of thrashing around, the sedative takes effect and Harambe falls to his knees in the stream and finally keels over - trapping what's left of the child under him in the water.

Zoo director goes on TV to defend the team's action saying "we sought outside input that was, in hindsight, less than informed and we're deeply distraught over the child's death at the hands of one of our animals."

So...what's the right approach ? In either situation, the real world or the alternative universe - was Harambe going to live to see sunset (because my bet is that he wasn't going to be long for the world after whooping the kid on the rocks in the alternate universe).

In this unfortunate situation, the best thinking made the decision. It wasn't a perfect decision, just the best. Others, often without the benefit of facts or an ability to understand the facts might offer a different interpretation that feeds other agendas but, in the end, in a binary decision of "save the kid vs. save Harambe"...they made the right choice. Unfortunately, not the perfect choice.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

13. Wish I could rec this post n/t

[cali]

16. Great post

[nolabear]

19. You're absolutely right.

I've got some past experience. They did the best they could and to second guess them with no knowledge or experience is to do them a grave disservice.

[GeorgeGist]

22. +1

[momto3]

24. Great post.

I grew up in Cincinnati and have been to the zoo many times. The Cincy zoo has a good reputation for there breeding programs for endangered animals. In fact, I believe I just read that they are building a Cheetah breeding facility. The only chance for many of these animals to survive is through these types of breeding programs.

Not all zoos are bad.

[DetlefK]

10. I rather believe the people who have day-to-day-experience with gorillas, not a random witness.

[sendero]

11. I saw the video..

... I don't think the gorilla had malicious intent toward the child. However, the gorilla DID jerk the child around like a rag doll. It is a miracle IMHO that the child was not seriously hurt.

The gorilla need only make one wrong movement to end the child's life.

[Nay]

12. I saw it, too, and agree with you. The gorilla did not seem to be attacking the

boy, but he was throwing the child, dragging the child through the shallow water, and just generally being very careless. It made me cringe to watch that poor child go through that. If I were one of the response team, I would not have hesitated to shoot the gorilla.

[edbermac]

14. Gorilla murder story?

So will the zoo employee be charged with first degree murder? second degree murder? Manslaughter, or rather gorillaslaughter?

[stone space]

17. Perhaps it would help to child-proof the cages? (nt)

[CincyDem]

18. Agreed. And this point was included in the zoo director's first comments.

The enclosure has been active for 37 years and has seen over 45 million visitors without incident. In general, not a bad track record...and hopefully it will be at least another 45 million visitors before anything else happens.

[magical thyme]

20. it doesn't take malicious intent for a very large animal to accidentally kill a human

They made the best decision they could under the circumstances.

I've just read the mother was there with 3 other children, one of them a baby in her arms.

That tells me it was the mother's fault for going to the zoo without adequate help to control the children. With that many children, either plan zoo trips with the spouse or other trustworthy adult or leash any that are ambulatory unless they are of an age that they understand not to enter animal enclosures.

[underahedgerow]

23. I'm absolutely certain those witnesses were all wild animal and animal behavioral experts.

Yeah, that was sarcasm.

I don't think the zoo officials made any mistakes at all. I think they acted in the best interests of the child and frankly in their own legal interests.

'What would have happened if'
The gorilla has smashed the kid's head against the rock, accidentally while waiting for the tranq to kick in?
If, while waiting for the tranq to kick in, the gorilla had grasped the child, fallen into the water and drowned the kid?
Decided to protect the kid from the zookeepers? And crushed him?

There are SO many variables in this situation, that the ONLY choice to make was to err on the side of protecting the child... And it's a great tragedy for everyone.

Kids are stupid and they make mistakes. Humans do too, and the parents made the mistake here, that lead to the child's endangerment and the gorilla's death. The zoo made no mistakes, they did the best they could considering the situation.

Stop blaming the zoo. While the animal wasn't at fault here, the decision had to be made on the spot about who was more important. In this case it was the kid.

It's a tragedy, but thankfully the kid should be ok.

Zookeepers are good, kind people who love the work they do, and form strong bonds with the animals in their charge. The same goes for people working in Animal Control. While there are commercial aspects to zoos that I don't like so much, by and large, the work they do these days is about species preservation, and in large part, the ONLY funds those species preservation projects receive are from public zoos. You can't have one without the other.