Reason 51
Daniel Dukes incident. Ventre: “Well, all I know is the public relations version of it… he climbed the barbed wire fence around the perimeter and stayed after hours.” Ventre was no longer employed at SeaWorld at the time of this incident in 1999, so he has no personal knowledge of the facts. There was no barbed wire fence.
Ventre literally says he only knows the public relations version of the incident. SeaWorld agrees with him yet presents it as a rebuttal. There was no mention of barbed wire in the Orange County Sheriff’s Office Investigator’s Report, that’s all SeaWorld has on Ventre… how pathetic.
Determination: Agree & Lie
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evidence:
Quote 1: “Well, all I know is the public relations version of it. He was a young man that had been arrested not long before he snuck into SeaWorld. Maybe he climbed the barbed-wire fence around the perimeter and stayed after hours..”
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Reason 52
Daniel Dukes incident. Jett: “Perfect storyline” suggesting that SeaWorld concocted a story. Jett was no longer employed at SeaWorld at the time of this incident in 1999, so he has no personal knowledge of the facts. “The cause of death was determined by the Medical Examiner to be an accidental drowning. Further demonstrating the falsity of the Film’s claim that Dukes’ death was a case of whale aggression…
What Jett’s words suggest is down to opinion. Ultimately, whether he’s suggesting “SeaWorld concocted a story” or not, Daniel Dukes’ history and actions allowed SeaWorld to avoid severe criticism up until Dawn Brancheau’s death. No one ever blamed SeaWorld for Dukes’ actions despite the fact their representation of the ocean’s top predator as cuddly animals who are safe to swim with more than likely gave Dukes the belief he could swim with an orca safely.
Jett did not need to work at SeaWorld at the time of the incident to know what happened or to say what he said. No trainer saw the incident, remember? So, even if he did work there at the time of the incident, his word wouldn’t have been any more reliable.
There was nothing accidental about Dukes’ death. Dukes’ autopsy detailed horrific injuries that he sustained prior to his death, some being: scrapes and bruises to the forehead, nose, eyelids, left lower eye socket, lower jaw, earlobes, left ear, chest, abdomen, shoulder, arms, right leg and foot, left hip, right knee, and left lower thigh. Mild haemorrhaging was also found beneath the skin of the skull and chest, as well as in the brain and bronchial tubes. Tilikum left Duke’s face in such a bad state that his funeral had to be held closed casket. All head and facial injuries were sustained whilst Dukes was alive…
Also, the film never explicitly claims Daniel Duke’s death was a case of whale aggression. Another blatant lie from SeaWorld.
Determination: Invalid / Debunked
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evidence:
Quote 1: “Perfect storyline. A mentally disturbed guy hides in the park after hours and strips his clothes off and decides he wants to have a magical experience with an orca and drowns because he became hypothermic. Right, so that’s the storyline, and none of us were there to know the difference.”
Link 1: https://www.scribd.com/doc/119465495/Daniel-Dukes-Medical-Examiners-Report
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Reason 53
Ventre: “He was not detected by the night watch trainers who were presumably at that station.” This is false. In 1999, there was no night trainer or watchperson stationed at Tilikum’s pool. Rather, there was a night watchman responsible for walking the entire perimeter of the stadium and pools.
If there was a night watchman who was “responsible for walking the entire perimeter of the stadium and pools” then he/she would’ve walked around Tilikum’s pool presumably numerous times throughout the night yet Daniel Dukes’ body wasn’t discovered until the next morning… seems questionable.
Also, SeaWorld’s response highlights another failure in their own protocols. An orca calf was born just two weeks before Dukes’ death. According to John Hargrove, not having any trainers stationed at Shamu Stadium to observe the mother (Kalina) and her newborn calf (Tuar) at night would go against any SeaWorld protocol he has ever followed. Clearly, Ventre was absolutely correct to assume nightwatch trainers were at Shamu Stadium at the time of the incident.
Determination: Invalid / Debunked
Reason 54
Jett: “There were cameras all over the back of Shamu’s Stadium, pointing every which way… I find it hard to believe that nobody knew until the morning that there was a body in there.” This is false. There were no cameras pointing to the back area at Shamu Stadium.
I cannot prove whether there were cameras in place at the time of the incident (although they’re definitely in place now) so, again, this is down to who you believe. You would assume SeaWorld knows their own camera layout, and they probably do, but they’ve lied multiple times throughout this analysis so I’m not inclined to believe them. Whether Jett was right or wrong, this is still an incredibly petty reason to criticise Blackfish. Point is, even if there wasn’t a camera pointing to the back of Shamu Stadium, a night watchman was on duty according to SeaWorld. They should’ve been able to spot a man in Tilikum’s tank rather quickly.
Determination: Agree & Invalid / Debunked
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evidence:
Quote 1: “There are cameras all over SeaWorld. There are cameras all over the back of Shamu Stadium pointing every which way. There are underwater cameras. I find it hard to believe that nobody knew until the morning that there was a body in there. They have a night watch trainer every night. That person didn’t hear any splashing or screaming or — I just find that really suspicious.”
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Reason 55
Ventre: “The public relations spin on this was that he was kind of a drifter and died of hypothermia but the medical examiner’s reports were more graphic than that.” This is false. There was no “public relations spin.”
There absolutely was a “public relations spin”. SeaWorld suggested the cause of death was a combination of hypothermia and drowning, as though Tilikum had little to do with Dukes’ death. The autopsy concluded the cause of death was indeed drowning, however there was no mention of hypothermia. Although the damage Tilikum caused to Dukes increased in severity after he died, Tilikum did not just watch Dukes drown. He inflicted a long list of injuries (see reason 52) before Dukes died.
Determination: Invalid / Debunked
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evidence:
Link 1: https://www.scribd.com/doc/119465495/Daniel-Dukes-Medical-Examiners-Report
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Reason 56
Jett: “So why keep Tilikum there? This guy . . his proven track record of killing people .. .he is clearly a liability to the institution” The statement “proven track record of killing people” is false and highly misleading. Regarding Dukes, there is no evidence of what happened to Dukes other than the Medical Examiner’s finding that Dukes accidentally drowned.
Tilikum was deemed equally responsible for the death of Keltie Bryne as the other two whales involved (Haida 2 and Nootka 4). He also contributed to the drowning of Daniel Dukes by inflicting some nasty injuries onto the man prior to his death, injuries that definitely wouldn’t have helped Dukes’ chances of saving himself from drowning. Forensic evidence supports the assumption that Tilikum was actively involved in Dukes’ death, therefore he absolutely has a “proven track record of killing people”. Jett stating so is not false or misleading. SeaWorld suggesting otherwise definitely is…
Determination: Invalid / Debunked
Reason 57
“Family Tree” of breeding by Tilikum. There is no scientific or other evidence linking the few incidents of whale aggression at SeaWorld to a whale’s genetic connection to Tilikum.
The family tree was to show the audience how many of SeaWorld’s orcas are related to Tilikum, not to suggest there is scientific evidence that whale aggression at SeaWorld can be linked to Tilikum’s genes. This isn’t a valid reason to criticise Blackfish.
Determination: Invalid / Debunked
Reason 58
Loro Parque sequence. This emotional part of the Film falsely implies that SeaWorld was involved in a cover- up to hide the circumstances surrounding the trainer’s death.
The film does not falsely imply this at all. It simply mentions that the whales belonged to SeaWorld and the orca trainers were trained using SeaWorld’s techniques. That’s all it says (in basic terms) about SeaWorld.
Determination: Invalid / Debunked
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evidence:
Quote 1 (Duffus): “Those were SeaWorld’s whales. They were trained using SeaWorld’s techniques, and their training was being supervised at the time of the fatal accident by one of their senior trainers from San Diego.”
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Reason 59
Loro Parque / Duffus: “For somebody to get up and say in a court of law that they had no knowledge of the linkage between SeaWorld and this park in Tenerife is well either, she doesn’t know when she is telling the truth or it’s a bold face lie.” This statement is false. SeaWorld has never denied that it has a business relationship with Loro Parque, however there is no formal affiliation between the two parks. Duffus misstates the trial record; there was no question posed regarding “linkage.”
SeaWorld has a point here. For context, Duffus is reacting to the following exchange between a SeaWorld attorney and SeaWorld head trainer Kelly Clark:
SA: You mentioned… Loro Parque is that park owned by SeaWorld?
KC: No, it’s not.
SA: Are they affiliated to your knowledge with SeaWorld?
KC: No.
Since SeaWorld admits it has a business relationship with Loro Parque, it’s best to refer to the definition of “affiliated” that’s specific to business relationships, that being: “Companies are affiliated when one company is a minority shareholder of another. In most cases, the parent company will own less than a 50% interest in its affiliated company. Two companies may also be affiliated if they are controlled by a separate third party. In the business world, affiliated companies are often simply called affiliates…”
By this definition, Clark was telling the truth. There is no evidence to suggest either marine parks are shareholders of the other, nor are both controlled by a third party. SeaWorld has loaned trainers and animals to Loro Parque (the latter of which Clark correctly states) but their business relationship does not extend to partial ownership and so they’re not affiliated.
Also… it’s rather petty that SeaWorld picked out one word (“linkage”), but as I’ve supported what the transcript has said over what SeaWorld believes Blackfish implies, I have to agree with this too to prevent being hypocritical.
Determination: Agree
Reason 60
Suzanne Allie discussing Loro Parque, its reputation, facilities, training and the quality of trainers, the whales, and SeaWorld’s purported responsibility for the incident. Ms. Allie was a videographer with no knowledge or expertise in the training of killer whales.
Allee (which is how it’s actually spelt) did not need knowledge or expertise in the training of killer whales to say what she said in Blackfish. She worked at Loro Parque and saw how inexperienced the trainers were throughout her time there. She even captured some examples of their inexperience on video. You don’t need expertise to realise trainers at Loro Parque were inexperienced, all you’d need to do is look at their CV’s. Allee’s comments were supported by Jenny Mairot, a supervisor at SeaWorld Orlando, who testified during the OSHA hearing that one of the reasons for the incident at Loro Parque was the inexperience of the trainers. This ultimately proves Allee’s statement was correct and that she did not require experience in training killer whales to state her claims accurately.
Determination: Invalid / Debunked