Legal Daily Tiger wounding incident, if the case will be how – View – People’s network pork face

Legal Daily: Tiger wounding, if the court does – View – original title: Tiger wounding, if the court will be how to talk about feelings, but the law is fair, fairness means clear responsibilities. How much compensation and compensation from the zoo, it needs to undertake the responsibility and liability in the event that the size of the Beijing wild zoo tiger wounding had been calm for some time, recently because the families of the injured up to speak to the media once again become the focus of public opinion, the family insisted that the responsibility for the incident and the zoo. Zoo compensation requirements. The family response boils down to roughly the following: first, the Zhao is not because of a quarrel before getting off, but because of sickness; second, the victim was signed the agreement, but not the main content carefully read the agreement; third, rescue workers rescue ineffective, the family requested rescuers refused to get off. Not surprisingly, the family once again responded by most netizens ridicule and accusations, in this incident, people’s point of view has formed a set of things, unless the entity part of a major reversal, otherwise it is difficult to fundamentally change people’s attitudes. There is no doubt that in this incident, the victim has a major fault, but this should not be a public ridicule and accusations for each accident are worthy of regret, every life worthy of compassion, who in life had not made a fool, did not happen boggling situation? Everyone has sympathy the grounds of ridicule and blame others too cold. However, on the contrary, in spite of our sympathy, some objective facts cannot be changed because of the sympathy and the. The zoo has responsibility for families that claim events whether there is a legal basis? If the case went to court to obtain legal support? This requires analysis of the evidence and the facts of the case, after all, whether the park or families are not likely to win the lawsuit by a word. First, we look at the family to respond to a few points there is no reason. The first point on why Zhao to get off, this is to respond to the netizens guess, and the law has nothing to do, the objective fact is that Zhao got off and caused significant consequences. Second points on the signing of the agreement, which is nothing to say, the modern rule of law society, we have this common sense, the signature shall prevail, the parties do not see the legal consequences caused by the same to bear. This is why many lawyers repeatedly remind you to see the content and then sign. Third points on the rescue workers get off the problem, which is discussed. Rescue workers are responsible for the protection and relief of tourists, their actions must be professional and standardized, they do not want to get off is not dependent on the family’s request, but depends on their operating norms. So whether or not they have fulfilled the responsibility and obligation of the rescue depends on whether their actions are in accordance with the requirements of the operating rules. Zoo aspects of this response is from the operating standards of the park, including staff, no one can get off without permission". Second, let’s look at the evidence. At that time the live video can be evidence. One of the zoo offers相关的主题文章: