Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

Parents sue Pittsburgh zoo in mauling death of 2-year-old boy who fell into wild dog exhibit

Posted by   + Show Post

As you can see the parents have sued even though it is the mother's fault her son is dead, and there were signs posted.  Dumb bitch.  I hate parents like this, they give good parents a bad name.

Parents sue Pittsburgh zoo in mauling death of 2-year-old boy who fell into wild dog exhibit

By Associated Press,May 23, 2013

PITTSBURGH — The parents of a 2-year-old boy who fell into a wild African dogs exhibit and was mauled to death last fall have sued the Pittsburgh zoo.

The lawsuit filed Thursday claims that officials had ample warning that parents routinely lifted children onto a rail overlooking the exhibit for a better view.

Jason and Elizabeth Derkosh seek unspecified damages in the Nov. 4 death of their son, Maddox. He fell from the wooden railing after his mother lifted him up to get a better look at the painted dogs.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-05-23/national/39465992_1_painted-dogs-pittsburgh-zoo-elizabeth-derkosh

 

by on May. 27, 2013 at 1:58 PM
Replies (41-48):
unspecified42
by Bronze Member on May. 27, 2013 at 10:28 PM

She should be in jail.

GLWerth
by Gina on May. 27, 2013 at 10:39 PM

I know, sorry if I sounded pissy there. 

She might be after money or she might be after a court telling her that it wasn't her fault. Or both.

I imagine the guilt is crushing.

Quoting valhallaarwen:

 Sorry about your daughter's death.  I didn't think you stated that she should sue btw.  I do think this woman is after money.

 

Quoting GLWerth:

I don't think she should be able to sue, or rather, that the case should not go forward very far, but I was stating a possible reason she might go forward with it.

When my daughter died, the doctor wasn't there and didn't answer her page and my emergency c-section was delayed by half an hour. I could possibly have sued, but since it wouldn't have brought my child back, I saw no point. Then again, I blamed myself for it for a long, long time, because I wasn't aggressive enough with the doctors and nurses.

Grief and guilt can do strange things to people and make actions seem reasonable that wouldn't under normal circumstances.

Of course, it is still possible that this woman simply wants a payoff, but it won't bring her child back and probably won't bring her peace.

Quoting valhallaarwen:

 If the doctor did something wrong with your daughter's medication or treatment that's one thing.  But this woman put her child in danger on purpose and therefore she should not be able to sue.

Quoting GLWerth:

I totally disagree with her suing the zoo. It was her fault, plain and simple for putting her child up on that rail.

However, there were probably multiple people telling her to sue...when our daughter died, so many people said "sue the doctor, sue the hospital".

After a while, maybe it convinced her of what she wanted to believe, that she was not at fault for her child's death.

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

JoshRachelsMAMA
by JRM on May. 27, 2013 at 10:45 PM
Yes, but civil courts and criminal courts have different levels of proof. While you need evidence beyond a resonable doubt in a criminal court, all you need is a preponderance of the evidence in civil court. Typically, a DA does not represent the People in a civil matter.

Quoting cjsbmom:I'm not so sure. The DA's office here found there was no cause to file charges against the zoo, so they will have a hard time proving in court that it was the zoo's fault. I am still angry with the zoo for closing the exhibit because of this. They closed it and sent all the dogs to other zoos. Quoting JoshRachelsMAMA:I bet she's betting on the zoo settling.

Weapons grade jackahole parents.


Quoting cjsbmom:I live here, and I totally disagree with them suing. As horrible as it must have been for that mother to watch her son being mauled to death, she bears responsibility for it because she lifted him above the railing in the first place. There are signs all over that exhibit that say do not stand or sit on the railing, etc., yet people routinely do it. She's not the first mother to put her child up on the railing like that. She's just the first one to lose her grip on him and have a tragedy of this nature occur. People fail to realize these are wild animals, whether they are in a zoo or not.
cjsbmom
by Lois Lane on May. 28, 2013 at 7:38 AM

True, but she will have to explain why she chose to hold her son up on a railing when there were numerous warning signs posted telling people not to do it. 

Actually, the woman stood her son up on the railing and let go of him so she could take her photo. That's what several witnesses said. Here is a 2 year old boy who has special needs to begin with, and she stood him on a railing and let go of him. I will be really, really shocked if a court even hears this case. 

Quoting JoshRachelsMAMA:

Yes, but civil courts and criminal courts have different levels of proof. While you need evidence beyond a resonable doubt in a criminal court, all you need is a preponderance of the evidence in civil court. Typically, a DA does not represent the People in a civil matter.

Quoting cjsbmom:I'm not so sure. The DA's office here found there was no cause to file charges against the zoo, so they will have a hard time proving in court that it was the zoo's fault. I am still angry with the zoo for closing the exhibit because of this. They closed it and sent all the dogs to other zoos. Quoting JoshRachelsMAMA:I bet she's betting on the zoo settling.

Weapons grade jackahole parents.


Quoting cjsbmom:I live here, and I totally disagree with them suing. As horrible as it must have been for that mother to watch her son being mauled to death, she bears responsibility for it because she lifted him above the railing in the first place. There are signs all over that exhibit that say do not stand or sit on the railing, etc., yet people routinely do it. She's not the first mother to put her child up on the railing like that. She's just the first one to lose her grip on him and have a tragedy of this nature occur. People fail to realize these are wild animals, whether they are in a zoo or not.


dawnie1
by #1 Raider fan on May. 28, 2013 at 7:50 AM

Come on now! Is anybody REALLY shocked??

emeraldangel20
by on May. 28, 2013 at 8:39 AM

her lawsuit is bogus

valhallaarwen
by Bronze Member on May. 28, 2013 at 12:03 PM

 I would love to see her try.  She would be laughed out of court.  She is an absolute moron, and I don't feel sorry for her.  She knew what she was doing was wrong and I don't know why she is even trying to get out of it  I wish the board of directors for the zoo could sue her instead.

 

Quoting cjsbmom:

True, but she will have to explain why she chose to hold her son up on a railing when there were numerous warning signs posted telling people not to do it. 

Actually, the woman stood her son up on the railing and let go of him so she could take her photo. That's what several witnesses said. Here is a 2 year old boy who has special needs to begin with, and she stood him on a railing and let go of him. I will be really, really shocked if a court even hears this case. 

kaylamom2004
by Bronze Member on May. 28, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Stupid ass parents not doing their job as PARENTS and now want to sue.

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)