Zoo Krefeld Fire at Krefeld Zoo

Afaik, Krefeld was one of the first and major importers of the species in the 1980s. Watching the males do their mating displays was one of the highlights of this zoo for me.
There might be a few specimens left in the private sector.

 

This is really sad. Can they import more and split into 2-3 zoo colonies? Thoughts are with everyone there!

 

Theoretically, zoos could, and a few (like Plzen) might. However, there's relatively little interest in the international zoo community in a non-endangered small mammal that isn't a crowd-pleaser, but a potential filovirus reservoir host.

 

Terrible news to start off 2020... let us hope it will only go up from here.
I don't understand why the public is still allowed to buy fireworks... they've been implicated in various house and property fires here in the states as well as elsewhere...

 

There's been a big public debate in Germany prior to the incident whether the sale of firework to private citizens should be limited or completely prohibited. Some Austrian and German cities banned fireworks completely from their inner districts during New Year's Eve. The reactions of the German people have been very divided, furious and emotional, comparable to Americans reacting to a general ban on private firearms. "Personal freedom"!! "It's tradition!!!" "Enough with the nanny state!!!" etc.
As a result, even more fireworks were bought in Austria and Germany at the end of the year.
The Chinese lanterns that apparently caused the Krefeld fire have already been illegal in most parts of Germany, but are nevertheless for sale online.

 

Sounds about the same as over here. Technically fireworks are illegal in a lot of areas here too, but not everywhere. And thus they constantly turn up in places they aren't allowed. Can't please everybody no matter how much you try to...

 

The three women are going to be charged, according to local facebook posts. It seems that they can be held liable in civil court for the damages, but criminal court will be harder, because apparently the place they bought them from didn't say they were illegal.
Security Check Required
A group for locals looking to help: Security Check Required

 

Personally I absolutely despise fireworks for the noise, the pollution and the risk for accidents and mayhem that come with it, and I am very much in favor of a total ban on the production, possession and use thereof. However I don't really see that happening anytime soon. And even if you did ban it you would have to enforce such a ban and that would be another huge challenge. As Batto pointed out a lot of people still see fireworks as something positive and as a tradition and even the idea of a ban can be counterproductive. Here in Flanders earlier this year a general regional ban was in fact implemented, however towns and cities can deviate from it and make there own regulations on fireworks, and the majority did chose to allow fireworks with limitations. However those limitations are often ignored and the enforcement of those regulations is a challenge, not in the least because police and authorities just don't have the manpower for it and have other priorities. The ban has also since been challenged in constitutional court by fireworks manufacturers.

I am not sure what can actually be done about fireworks but I think the only realistic options would be improved regulations to make the usage of fireworks as safe as possible, improved enforcement, cracking down on places (including online) that sell illegal materials, encouragement and education of the public towards safe and sensible use or lack of use and towards a change of view and much tougher punishments for those who abuse or are negligent. Personally I would very much like to see the fireworks tradition end as soon as possible, but I think I can only hope it will be better controlled in the future, with less accidents and mayhem.

I really don't understand that argument for them not to held liable in a criminal court. If you buy say a large kitchen knife I don't think that it comes with warnings that abuse or negligent use could cause serious bodily harm or even death. And yet if you did wrongfully injure or even kill someone with a knife, even through negligence, I believe you would still be held accountable and probably would get a sentence under criminal law. Is there not such a thing also as common sense and prudential conduct? Should it not be assumed that any citizen should have the wherewithal to know that releasing an open flame into the air and into city without any form of control is a really, really bad idea and could go very wrong indeed? Is it too much to assume that it should be expected of any citizen to act responsibly when using dangerous materials, or to be held accountable when negligence results in damage or injury?

Personally I still believe that the people responsible should be held responsible in criminal court, and that it should be up to a judge to determine their criminal responsibility. I also still stand by my view that they should get very serious jailtime (years or even decades) for both negligent arson and animal abuse.

Also, if they are held liable for civil damages, unless they happen to be very wealthy, how are they ever going to pay for all the damage they caused, even if they sell all their property? I'm not even sure how you would even calculate those damages. The value of a building is one thing, but how does one value animals for which there are probably no legal commercial or trade prieces? And would about the emotional damage to zoo staff and such? All very, very difficult to determine.

 

The 'place they bought them from' might not be in either Germany or in the Krefled area. The reckless use of a legal item is still an offence, the knife example. I can give a comparable situation. A couple of decades ago it was legal for farmers in the UK to burn waste, unwanted straw in the fields after the corn was harvested. It was a practice done for decades, and destroyed many weeds and pests which now have to be controlled with pesticides and other chemicals. Most years it gave little problem, but eventually it was banned. Whilst it was legal, any losses as a consequence of the practice going wrong - personal loss, costs incurred by the Fire Brigade etc were recoverable from the farmer, who was also personally legally liable, despite using a perfectly legal match and undertaking a perfectly legal process - unless it went wrong. The person who set off the lantern is in the same position consequential loss wise, save what she did was illegal too...

 

Not Krefled, of course - the system would not let me edit...

 

Is there no such thing as criminal intent required for criminal charges. I would be more inclined to measure this dramatic episode as negligent behavior without any criminal intent. Think of it what you will but I assume that is the current sit.

Even in homicide there is a difference w

 

I'm just quoting what the town page said, and they gave the specific laws.

It isn't really comparable to a knife. Knives are legal, you know you're injuring/killing someone (whether premeditated or not), and it would be easy to confirm it was your knife. Even though these women confessed, if German criminal court is anything like US, hey would need to prove beyond doubt that the deadly lanterns were ones released by these women. They also didn't intend to harm. Turning themselves in will go a long way, I imagine, since it would have been very difficult to find them otherwise.

Damages are calculated for that sort of thing pretty often.

 

According to the official information, it seems to be a very tragic chain of events:

The three women (mother around 60 and her two daughters around 30) turned themselves in right when they heard about the damage they had caused (or for then: might have caused). They did so, although it would have been difficult (perhaps impossible) to find them out. They did not even consult a lawyer and gave very specific information: They had sent off 5 sky lanterns, 4 of which were still found near the building, the last one with very high certainty caused the fire.

They also weren't the only ones to have send off such lanterns that night in the area. Others were very relieved, when they found out it wasn't their lanterns which caused the fire. I think this is relevant to estimate the possibility that these three women are trustworthy in other details. They claim that they were neither aware of the possible danger by such lanterns nor of the ban on them. As far as I understand it also has been confirmed that the website they ordered them from did not contain any such warning (which now is being added by companies selling it, many taking it out of their shops). The momen even state they specifically looked for an alternative to traditionel firework without chemistry or noise, as they did not want to scare animals or harm the environment (they had even written good wishes for the new year on their lanterns).

Police states that the three women genuinely are under a severe psychological shock and even need protection and support now. They did not even consult a lawyer and very likely are telling the truth, because of the massive feelings of guilt and shame. Without any doubt they still acted in a very naive and negligent way and the harm has been done. They will face charges. According to legal experts theoretically this could mean up to 5 years in prison or a very high fine along with compensation claims amounting to dozens of millions. There will be many relevant factors of course, possibly also including the weak fire protection of the building and coincidential factors (e.g. dry leaves on an easily inflamable roof on top of a building with many highly inflamable contents). If it was not for the specifics of the building, there might have been far less damage and existing (and accessible) outdoor enclosures could at least have saved many monkeys and apes.

Besides that they face a huge digital hate wave (some wish them to die or actively be killed in a similar way or even threaten to hunt them down and kill them). Police confirmed these cyber attacks and state the women consider leaving their home town.

In short: The three women very likely had no bad intentions, but acted very naively and negligently (along with many others as it appears) and caused massive harm, torment and pain. Besides feeling extreme guilt and shame they very likely will encounter criminal charges and substantial compensation claims and possibly will be financially ruined by that. They also encounter high levels of hate and may leave their home and their home town. To me this feels tragic without anything left to win, except for public awareness and some stronger restrictions and regulations on different levels (there already have been some consequences as stated above).

 

While I respect the sentiments expressed in the above post, and while I vehemently disagree with hate messages and threats (which are illegal and should be punished), I personally cannot feel any pity for these women or wish for any for forgiveness or understanding towards them. I do not wish any harm to come to them though. Also I feel that the best way to keep them safe would be to detain them and lock them up in prison at least for the duration of the investigation and for some time to let the worst shock and anger over this tragedy settle a bit.

Krefeld Zoo opened its door again to the public yesterday. The burned down ape house and area around it were screened off. The articles below say that the Kriminalpolizei is conducting further investigations, with the help of experts, into the cause and development of the fire at Krefeld Zoo. There seems to be a possibility the building's structure contributed to the fire.
https://www1.wdr.de/nachrichten/rheinland/ermittlungsergebnisse-krefeld-zoo-affenhaus-feuer-100.html
Privacy settings

Meanwhile the animal rights groups have also began to stir and began to criticize the Krefeld Zoo, as well as to use the tragic fire as an argument against the captive husbandry of great apes and zoos in general. They just had to start kicking and stomping on everyone's shock and grief, didn't they? Or as someone in the comments on the ZooNews Digest Facebook page said "There is no corpse too warm for an untalented hack to preach atop".
Krefeld Zoo blaze sparks ethical debate about animal captivity
Zoo Krefeld: PETA fleißig bei Leichenflädderei | zoosmedia

 

I'm not surprised that there are rather different sentiments on this issue. Personally, I feel empathy for the animals, the zoo staff and everyone attached to it, but I also do feel empathy towards the three women. The rest will be up to the courts now anyways.

 

I second all ye said! I do take exception at those with a lack of empathy for the 3 women under investigation: they certainly need not the hate mail and armchair critics who judge at will of pen and mind racing! It is commendable they did come forward almost instantly when it was suspected their fireworks might have played a part in the drama that unfolded at the Great Ape House.

Secondly, the critique of the animal welfare crap squad quite frankly is veering on the hate mail mark too. Whereas free speech in democracy is a great good some of these remarks on Twatter and F*book equal criminal hate mailists and frankly should face the full force of civil law too. No more open hunting!

 

Though on a smaller scale, two of my dogs were killed on July 4, 2013 by a kind of firecracker that also continues burning until its descent, but to make a very loud shrill sound. Left at the moment andsite was " long mini-rocket, complete with fins. This device exploded inches between both, and they were likely killed by instantaneous heart attacks. Fireworks are illegal, but readily available at the PA state border. Don't people ever consider that what goes up, must come down? My dogs were playing on my deck, enclosed by a locked fence, about 80 feet from the shooters in the street. If these contraptions all must fall somewhere, that by sheer odds will be on private property. This should be an obvious crime of using an illegal weapon that can cause death,. Furthermore, they should be held accountable when their fireworks land in private land and cause death or damage as a result. I was so disgusted and heartsick that I never reported the deaths to anyone. Ànd I never bred another dog. .

 

As I have previously expressed, while I wish them no harm and disagree with hate and threats, I'm not sure I have any true empathy or forgiveness for them. I agree that is commendable that they had the responsibility to report themselves to the police so quickly and I understand that they must be feeling very guilty and ashamed. They shouldn't be dealing with hate or not being safe. I also still feel that they should answer for their actions in a criminal court and should face very severe legal consequences for them, including jail time and compensation payments. But that will be up to the discretion of a court and not to me. And I guess the lack of criminal intent and them expressing their guilt over their actions will probably be taken into account, though hopefully not to the extent that they excuse their actions from legal ramifications.

With regards to the animal rights activists, spewing hateful, threatening, intimidating and slanderous messages is something they do all the time and yet they usually keep getting away with it. Yes, in a democratic society they should be able to express their view - however lunatic they may be - but they should face legal consequences if they descend into threats, intimidation and slander. There is an urgent need for just that to happen to protect animal-related industries from the criminal tactics of the animal rights movement.

That is absolutely awful, I am very sorry to hear that. Tragedies like this (and I've heard many more with animals sadly) are one of the reasons why I hate fireworks and would love for that tradition to be ended, as some people are never going to be responsible with that crap and will always end up damaging property or harming people or animals.