Comments on: Another Chimp Attack

By: resolute1

resolute1 — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:16:20 +0000

Good comments on this article, here is my opinion. This was an entirely preventable tragedy and there are nothing but victims here. The genesis was when the chimps owner tried to integrate this animal into her life as a pseudo-child. She dressed him up like one and there are other similar stories and they all seem to have the same tragic ending. The chimp was not the problem, it did what chimps do. The friend who was mauled was just trying to help. This attack is a derivative of two things. One, the fact that there were not laws in place to prevent people from owning dangerous animals that can overcome safety barriers and endanger others. So I seperate snakes, reptiles and similarly dangerous creatures because if properly caged, they present a danger to their handlers only. A chimpanzee is intelligent enough to try and escape the hardiest of enclosures. Two, the owner is responsible in my opinion because she had been warned that the chimp was dangerous by an animal control officer. I agree with the comment that the owner was all too clear for the police to shoot the chimp, I suspect that resolve didn’t happen overnight and she must have seen the signs of impending danger but chose to ignore them. She was emotionally attached to the chimp. Humans become close to their pets and to her, the chimp was like a son. That’s where the trouble began. She should face charges of some type and although this incident has probably ruined her life already, she should go to prison for at least a year for reckless endangerment for putting her own selfish wants and desires before the safety of the public at large. Her lack of consideration of the dangers involved was indeed criminally negligent. To me it is as if she had laid a loaded pistol on a table with small child in the house, say initially the child was unable to reach it but she knew it eventually would, but she just left it there and hoped for the best. The people who try to bring these chimps up as family members seem to have some emotional detachment from humans and want the next closest thing. I would have to say I think most of these chimp owners have some type of social dysfunction. Not that all animal lovers are like that, but these chimp cases all seem so extreme. Dressing them in human clothes, sitting them at the dinner table, treating them like a human being when they are, in fact, dangerous animals that can maim or kill in a moments notice.
Now the chimps owner is being sued for 50 million dollars by the victims family. I hope they win and the DA presses criminal charges as well. You would think the tales of these chimps mauling people and destroying lives would be enough to prevent this from happening again, but maybe this woman needs to be made an example of, and the next person that wants to try this foolishness will think twice.

By: cliffhanger042002

cliffhanger042002 — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 17:51:27 +0000

I agree Kittenz, there have probably been more facts and parts of the story that have been witheld than divulged. There will be little parts and pieces come to light here and there. I also agree that there must have been some reason for her to give the chimp an anti-anxiety medication, a strong one at that. It sounds like the chimp was already having some behavioral problems prior to the incident.

By: kittenz

kittenz — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:21:06 +0000

By the way, it seems to me that the 911 operator took an awfully long time to send help. Granted, the woman was frantic and hysterical, but still, I think the response should have been immediate.

By: kittenz

kittenz — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:15:50 +0000

According to the news reports that I have read, Ms. Herold now says that she did not give her chimp any Xanax. But at the time of the attack, she said that she gave him Xanax in a cup of tea. The Xanax was not prescribed for the chimp; I gather it was her own prescription. I'm not an authority on chimpanzees by any means, but giving medicine prescribed for someone else to any animal (or any person for that matter) is very risky. The side effects of Xanax can cause unpredictable, erratic behavior, including violent behavior, in humans, and probably in chimps, as well. I wonder why Sandra Herold felt the need to give the Xanax to her chimp in the first place? Was this something that she routinely did, or was Travis acting unusually agitated, that his owner felt the need to medicate him? There are a lot of unanswered questions swirling around this incident. I listened to the recording of the 911 call, and what I heard was a woman gripped by stark, raving terror. She wanted that chimp dead: no "my poor chimp" or regret of any kind was evident from that call. She was deathly afraid of that chimp and I don't think that kind of fear could just suddenly develop in an instant. I believe that she must have been afraid of him for a long time. I think that there has to be a lot more to this than we know. The owner is trying to do damage control now, and take back some of what she said and did initially, to try to absolve herself of responsibility for her friend's horrendous injuries, but she must have known for a long time that Travis was becoming dangerous.

By: cliffhanger042002

cliffhanger042002 — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 14:09:01 +0000

kittenz – At the time I formed my initial opinion and left comments about whether or not it should be considered a crime, there had not yet been mention of the previous attack. I also had not heard the extent of the injuries or really paid much attention to the “xanax”. So based on that new information, it does change how I feel to a certain extent. And I also wonder what kind of impact the dosing of the animal with xanax had. Did a vet prescribe the drugs? Or did the owner just takes some pills out of her purse and give them to the chimp without a licensed vet prescribing the meds to the chimp. I know xanax is a very common anti-anxiety med for humans, but does it have the exact same effect on chimps? I wouldn’t know. And I feel that may have possibly been a contributing factor. If prescribed by a vet, then it doesn’t reflect badly upon the owner, but if she just self-medicated the animal without knowing whether or not it was safe to do so, then that’s another thing completely. So there is alot to consider, and I’m sure there will be a DA considering all this evidence to determine if she should be charged with a crime. I do feel that if it is “legal” to own an animal and the animal has no previous history of aggression or attacks, and the owner acts responsibly, then no criminal charges should be filed. Our society allows us to keep animals of all kinds, so this could happen to anyone. But when there is a history of aggression, we are responsible for taking the appropriate action, and lack of doing so should be a crime if others get injured or killed. So I think now the earlier opinion I formed is thrown out and I would just need to see all the evidence before coming to any conclusion.

By: Averagefoot

Averagefoot — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 22:04:29 +0000

I suppose that getting her face torn off and being blinded by a pissed off chimp is punishment enough. I wouldn’t want to live like that.

By: DWA

DWA — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 19:37:32 +0000

Kittenz:

Arguing against not a jot of what you said…that woman is as much a victim as anyone in this piece.

On another thread on this topic I talk about “tragic,” used right. The media and the public use it, almost without exception, to mean “sad,” which word does not appear, once, in the definition in my Webster’s.

Oh if tragic were ever used properly, it would be here. Shakespeare could write a play about it. Heroine bridges the gap; teaches the dumb animal, takes it in, trains it to be human and to live like we do…and right when the apotheosis appears reached, is done in by the simple, always present fact that the other animals’ hearts and minds are not known to us, and cannot be. And has to kill her creation while, in the act of destroying her friend’s face, it silently, uncomprehendingly implores her to stop.

In fact, if Shakespeare wrote this up, it would be far too wrenching to watch. All he would need is his voice …and the simple facts.

THIS is tragedy. Of the highest sort. Sad doesn’t even close to cut it.

By: kittenz

kittenz — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:22:22 +0000

It now comes to light that the chimp had bitten at least one other person, and the owner knew it. So, yes, I think she is guilty of a crime.

A dog (in most states) gets one bite, before it is labeled “viscious”. After that, the owner is presumed to know that the animals hes the propensity to bite.

This owner knew that her pet had bitten someone; therefore it especially behooved her to make sure that the animal was not allowed to bite again.

The woman who was attacked lost both of her eyes, her nose, and part of her jaw. Her life is changed forever because some woman wanted to be Tarzan.

By: ARO

ARO — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 00:21:16 +0000

Wow people are just stupid, when are they gonna learn that monkeys are not people and you cannot treat them as a person or keep them as a pet. THEIR WILD ANIMALS FOR PETES SAKE, and are not domesticated.

By: PeterOtoole

PeterOtoole — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:57:36 +0000

Now just imagine a Bigfoot attack…