snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Disney

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 09 January 2007, 11:10 AM
Fujicakes
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charlie23 View Post
And that the kid had to get codeine pills for his "neck injury".
Oh yeah, I saw that on the news early yesterday morning, and it struck me funny. From the looks of it, it seemed like they were playing around for the camera, since Tigger barely tapped the kid in the face and the kid seemed to smack him a little harder.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09 January 2007, 12:03 PM
Ms. Congeniality's Avatar
Ms. Congeniality Ms. Congeniality is offline
 
Join Date: 12 September 2005
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 344
Disney

I would like to see who prescribed codiene to a teenager. It's not something a good practitioner does on the first visit.

The guy in the Tigger suit should counter sue for the injury he sustained when the kid smacked him on the top of the head. Didn't someone else mention how heavy the headpiece was?

Last edited by Ms. Congeniality; 09 January 2007 at 12:11 PM. Reason: because I am not quite awake yet.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09 January 2007, 01:17 PM
Mickey is a gyrl's Avatar
Mickey is a gyrl Mickey is a gyrl is offline
 
Join Date: 12 January 2006
Location: SE Georgia
Posts: 6,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ms. Congeniality View Post
I would like to see who prescribed codiene to a teenager. It's not something a good practitioner does on the first visit.

The guy in the Tigger suit should counter sue for the injury he sustained when the kid smacked him on the top of the head. Didn't someone else mention how heavy the headpiece was?
I've never had to have a prescription for work-induced injuries, and I've had whiplash, bruised bones, and a shoulder popped out of socket. Also, a lot of characters won't try to cause trouble like that.

Oh, and the original report now has the incident report posted.

Could people please cite the other places they see/read the articles? I'd be interested to read everything being said.

Last edited by Mickey is a gyrl; 09 January 2007 at 01:25 PM. Reason: More info and I just woke up...and more information I forgot to add
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09 January 2007, 02:51 PM
LittleDuck's Avatar
LittleDuck LittleDuck is offline
 
Join Date: 29 October 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,329
Default

Has any article reported this "kid's" age? He looks 13/14-ish. Also, I'm willing to bet that the parents retained a lawyer hoping that Disney will settle out of court rather than go to trial. I also imagine DIsney would do just that. If they do go to trial, a jury would see "big, bad Disney" trying to take advantage of poor old-young child-boy-young man and award $$$ anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09 January 2007, 02:56 PM
Four Kitties's Avatar
Four Kitties Four Kitties is offline
snopes minion
 
Join Date: 29 July 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 23,828
Hello Kitty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malruhn View Post
We only see a little bit of the "altercation", and I wonder if the teen didn't pinch, push or grope Tigger before Tigger reacted. I've watched as kids abuse the hell out of Disney Characters - and I wonder if this isn't just a ploy to get dollars.
When I saw the video on the news, it was with a "watch this" lead-in, so I didn't know what was going to happen. I thought the kid was going to take Tigger down; it appeared to me that he had Tigger by the scruff of the neck. It was only after the clip was over that they told me Tigger is the one in trouble.

Ridiculous. IMHO Tigger was trying to break the kid's grip on his costume and, due to his limited vision, clocked the kid in the face. No more than he deserved, I think.

The rest is a "Disney has deep pockets: let's sue" thing.

I hope the kid gets charged or counter-sued for battery.

ETA: I saw an interview with Tigger's attorney on the news yesterday. She says he was being choked and swung his arm in an attempt to break the kid's hold on the back of his costume. She also said the actor has been suspended, "but if he'd said anything to the kid, asked him to let go, he'd have been fired immediately for breaking character."

Four Kitties
__________________
“The path to true enlightenment is the ability to formulate and express one's own thoughts, and not somebody else's.” -- Auntie Witch
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 09 January 2007, 02:57 PM
Mickey is a gyrl's Avatar
Mickey is a gyrl Mickey is a gyrl is offline
 
Join Date: 12 January 2006
Location: SE Georgia
Posts: 6,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleDuck View Post
Has any article reported this "kid's" age? He looks 13/14-ish. Also, I'm willing to bet that the parents retained a lawyer hoping that Disney will settle out of court rather than go to trial. I also imagine DIsney would do just that. If they do go to trial, a jury would see "big, bad Disney" trying to take advantage of poor old-young child-boy-young man and award $$$ anyway.
According to the incident report, he turned 14 in October.

What's brilliant (sarcasm) is that the incident report didn't pixellate the address of the family in the incident report.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 09 January 2007, 02:58 PM
Fun with a 9mm
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
Yeah, Tigger must have had his claws retracted. Did you expect maybe he'd have a big shiner?
A bruise? A red mark? Dander?
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 09 January 2007, 03:25 PM
Ms. Congeniality's Avatar
Ms. Congeniality Ms. Congeniality is offline
 
Join Date: 12 September 2005
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 344
Disney

This was in the Miami Herald yesterday. It was very short and had the video from AP.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...s/16406931.htm
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 09 January 2007, 07:11 PM
Donfrow's Avatar
Donfrow Donfrow is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2004
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 919
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by talk2sparky View Post
But it is Disney's policy that you're NEVER to break character, so I guess Tigger shouldn't have done that, accidental or not.
Are there no expections to this rule?

If not, the only option is to be fired?
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10 January 2007, 12:36 AM
Raven
 
Posts: n/a
Default

One might argue that Tigger "bouncing" someone is perfectly in character.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 10 January 2007, 01:21 AM
Aktrys
 
Posts: n/a
Soapbox

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donfrow View Post
Are there no expections to this rule?

If not, the only option is to be fired?
I don't know what Disney's policies are, but I worked in Characters at one of the Paramount theme parks as both a character as well as a cohort, or "bodyguard," if you will. There, it was also VERY strictly enforced that in costume, one was never to speak or break character. The only exception being in a life-threatening situation, and an assault such as this would not have gone under such a category. Despite the fact that he felt he was being choked, as a friend of mine who now works for Disney said of the situation, 'Tigger' would not hit someone. No matter how much that guy probably deserved it, the fact remains that there were very likely a lot of other small children around who saw that and got very confused as to why Tigger was behaving in a way they weren't used to seeing, you see?

I will say this, though. Anyone who thinks the whack was unprovoked clearly has no idea what it's like to do that job. It's not all smiles and hugs. Those are the encounters that make the job worthwhile, but there are a very large percentage (in my experience, anyway) of negative encounters like this. Putting on that costume, you know you're going to get jeered and messed with by stupid teenagers. It's not a day if you don't. So, you have a lot more patience than you probably normally would because it's going to be a long day if you don't. But when someone starts messing with your costume, there is nothing more irritating, especially when it causes discomfort or worse, pain.

That cohort shouldn't have walked away, I feel. I did that job more often, and while we were also encouraged to watch the line, under no circumstance was it permissable to stop watching our character. It's possible the person saw the camera and tried to get out of the shot, and in walking too far away, didn't see Tigger plaintively trying to get his/her attention. I noticed in the very beginning of the video, Tigger is looking to the side. If everything was fine and dandy, he'd have been facing the camera, don't you think? I can only assume the kid was already doing something dumb and he was trying to get his cohort's attention. At least, I hope that's what he was trying to do, because that's what he should have done. Failing that, if he really couldn't breathe, it's no wonder he must have panicked. I really feel for the guy, and I hope everything works out for him. I almost hope he does countersue, and then wins. That would be a goal scored for the characters. People might actually realize, "Oh hey, it's BAD to abuse these people! We could actually get in trouble!" That would be nice. If he lost, though, it would make it seem like it was okay to assault characters, and that is a scary thought.

Sorry for rambling!
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10 January 2007, 01:57 AM
damian's Avatar
damian damian is offline
 
Join Date: 14 April 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,504
Default

If Tigger was sued, would they find a jury of his peers?

How do frivilous suits like this ever make it to court? The kid suffered no damage whatsoever.

This is the kind of thing that makes the rest of the world laugh at the American justice system. Seriously, it's time that juries told plaintiff's in frivilous law suits to get stuffed.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10 January 2007, 12:40 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,789
Default

I've seen the movie and I have no idea why you all are saying it's clear the kid was at fault. But even if he did pull Tigger's suit and even if he did it with intent to harm, I don't think a grown man hitting a boy of this age is somthing to be condoned at all. If Tigger had clocked my son, I'd probably be the one they were arresting for assault. There were so many other ways for this to be resolved besides hitting a 14-year-old in the face. I wonder if you'd all be saying the same thing if the child had been a girl. If I were the judge, I'd probably make Tigger take some anger management classes. I've taught big and little kids before. I know they can be rough. But hitting a child in the face should never ever be tolerated. Period.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10 January 2007, 12:45 PM
Mickey is a gyrl's Avatar
Mickey is a gyrl Mickey is a gyrl is offline
 
Join Date: 12 January 2006
Location: SE Georgia
Posts: 6,686
Default

Ganzfeld, Tigger hitting the boy was an accident, from what I could see. Tigger's vision is extremely limited, and he may have misjudged the boy's height. To me, it looked like they both started tripping on the curb, and Tigger went to grab the kid's shoulder to steady him, and accidentally hit the kid's face.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 10 January 2007, 01:17 PM
Troberg Troberg is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 November 2005
Location: Borlänge, Sweden
Posts: 11,580
Default

Quote:
To me, it looked like they both started tripping on the curb, and Tigger went to grab the kid's shoulder to steady him, and accidentally hit the kid's face.
That's what it looks like to me as well, and that should probably be the story Tigger should have gone with if he was going to get away with it.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10 January 2007, 01:33 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,789
Fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey is a gyrl View Post
Ganzfeld, Tigger hitting the boy was an accident, from what I could see. Tigger's vision is extremely limited, and he may have misjudged the boy's height. To me, it looked like they both started tripping on the curb, and Tigger went to grab the kid's shoulder to steady him, and accidentally hit the kid's face.
I can understand that. That may be so, in which case it isn't Tigger's fault but that doesn't automatically make the parents are wrong to stick up for his son if he thinks the overgrown feline smacked the boy. I agree the codeine and the hype surrounding the case has been a little ridiculous but the premise of the parent's claim is not ridiculous or frivolous. It is not 100% clear what happened so I don't think it is right to criticize the parents or the boy at this time. (From what I heard, Tigger had admitted to hitting the boy. Is that not right? He didn't say he accidentally puched the boy in the face, as I recall.)
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10 January 2007, 02:03 PM
Mickey is a gyrl's Avatar
Mickey is a gyrl Mickey is a gyrl is offline
 
Join Date: 12 January 2006
Location: SE Georgia
Posts: 6,686
Default

I've accidentally hit someone in the face before. And I said I hit them in the face. But how do we know that Tigger's comment wasn't isolated to make it sound like it was on purpose?
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 10 January 2007, 02:49 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey is a gyrl View Post
I've accidentally hit someone in the face before. And I said I hit them in the face. But how do we know that Tigger's comment wasn't isolated to make it sound like it was on purpose?
Of course there's no way of knowing. But I don't see that as a reason to badmouth the parents or call their claim "frivolous", etc. I dislike frivolous lawsuits as much as anyone but the facts of this case are not so clear cut. If the parents genuinely feel the cat bat the brat then it's not so crazy to try get the best position in court should it come to that. I can't say I wouldn't do the same thing. Some of this has been a little over the top but that does not at all suport comments like, "I hope the kid gets charged or counter-sued for battery." -- If you'll forgive me, 4K, for pulling your comment out. Just the first one I found while backtracking.

Let's see what each side claims first. The video doesn't really show much in the way of evidence.The media reports have been contradictory, as far as I can tell. If what Hamilton said is true and Tigger admitted hitting the boy in the face, I don't see any way you can condone it no matter what the kid did.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 10 January 2007, 03:41 PM
Mickey is a gyrl's Avatar
Mickey is a gyrl Mickey is a gyrl is offline
 
Join Date: 12 January 2006
Location: SE Georgia
Posts: 6,686
Default

The first news report (from the OP) had the dad saying all he wanted was an apology from the person playing Tigger. In fact...

Quote:
"The general manager apologized to me," Monaco Sr. said. "Everybody will come up and apologize to me but Tigger. He won't be a man about it and get out of the costume and come out and apologize to my son. I didn't want VIP treatment. I didn't want an extra day at Disney. I didn't want any of that. I wanted him to apologize and that is the one thing that they won't do."
(from the original news article)

Then the family consults a lawyer. Then the boy apparently is in enough pain to warrant a codeine prescription. The "neck pain" complaint is a common one that scummy attorneys (IME) say the person should use. And you're trying to say that going to court is absolutely justified? And you're saying that Tigger shouldn't press charges about that kid whacking him on the head? If you're playing devil's advocate, I completely respect that. But please, don't try to justify the family's actions when they've said in another news story that they wouldn't pursue legal actions like this.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10 January 2007, 03:48 PM
Johnny Slick's Avatar
Johnny Slick Johnny Slick is offline
 
Join Date: 13 February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 11,628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donfrow View Post
Are there no expections to this rule?
Everybody plays the fool.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.