Had the child been killed, it is fairly obvious that the zoo would have to pay out, but does that mean the parent had no duty to supervise? Of course not--all parents have a duty to ensure the kids' safety.
We think this person we saw online, expressed it best:
"Let me get this straight... if you turn your back on your child in a zoo, who tells you he wants to go into a gorilla cage, and he goes in, causing the gorilla to be put down there is no negligence...but parents all over the country are being charged for negligence for allowing their kids to play
California Penal Code 273a PC punishes acts of child endangerment . . .
Unlike the California crime of child abuse, a child endangerment conviction does not require that any child suffer an actual injury.2
Therefore, it is easy (and unfortunately quite common) for innocent people to face prosecution under California child endangerment laws.
For you to be guilty of child endangerment, all of these facts must be true:
- You did ONE of the following:
a. willfully inflicted unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering on a child,
b. willfully caused or permitted a child to suffer unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering,
c. caused or permitted a child in your care or custody to be injured, or
d. caused or permitted a child in your custody to be placed in a dangerous situation;
- You were criminally negligent (if the allegation is that you did (b), (c), or (d) above); AND
- You did not act while reasonably disciplining the child.
In addition, if you are charged with wobbler child endangerment under Penal Code 273a(a) PC . . . instead of misdemeanor child endangerment under Penal Code 273a(b) PC . . . then the prosecutor must also prove that:
- You acted under circumstances that were likely to produce great bodily harm or death.
- You did not act while reasonably disciplining the child.