Keep Tigger Away From Your Kids

[gitreel]

Tigger's rep has been tarnished.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001994546_tigger02.html

Keep Tigger out of sex trial, Disney asks

By Anthony Colarossi and Sean Mussenden
The Orlando Sentinel

ORLANDO, Fla. — A leopard can't change its spots, but Walt Disney World wants to hide Tigger's stripes — at least when the costume of the bouncy tiger shows up this week in court in a sexual-molestation trial.
To protect the frenetic feline's innocent image, a Disney lawyer has suggested that the orange Tigger costume be dyed black or white and its ears be removed. The lawyer made the request to the attorney representing Michael C. Chartrand in the trial that was scheduled to start today.

Chartrand was suspended after he was charged with molesting a 13-year-old girl in February at Disney World's Toon Town while he was dressed as Tigger, a character from A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh books.

Any case in which a child's storybook character is linked to a sex crime is bound to be strange. But the arrest was just the prelude of what now promises to be a bizarre courtroom showdown.

Chartrand's lawyer, Jeffrey Kaufman Jr., also has played Tigger at Disney and works part time as a costumed character at the theme park. He said he reached out to Chartrand because he thought he was uniquely qualified to defend him.

"No attorney on the planet could represent this guy better than me in this case," he said.

Prosecutors hope to use as evidence about 200 photographs of tourists posing with Tigger and other characters. But the defense claims there's no way to prove Chartrand was in all the photos.

The victim's family has contacted a lawyer about suing Disney. It is the threat of such litigation and the fear of bad publicity that has Disney in full damage-control mode.

"Disney doesn't want this costume out there," Kaufman said. "They want to protect their copyright. They want to take off everything that would make it look like Tigger."

Disney spokeswoman Jacquee Polak confirmed that company attorneys had expressed concern to both Orange-Osceola Florida State Attorney Lawson Lamar and to Kaufman about using the Tigger costume during the trial.

"Our hope is that the use of our costume will be handled with appropriate sensitivity so as to preserve the dreams and magic for our younger guests as much as possible," she said.


However, Polak would not comment on Kaufman's statement that a Disney attorney had suggested taking off Tigger's ears or coloring the costume.

Kaufman said he refused to let the costume be changed because an altered Tigger suit might reflect poorly on his client, making him look demonic or freakish.

Kaufman said he expects jurors to take the costume with them during deliberations, where they could handle it and put on the mask and gloves. Kaufman said he hopes by doing that they would be able to tell how difficult it would be to grope a young girl.

The suits are often bulky and limit the wearer's sight, say Kaufman and others who have played characters. Kaufman compared the Tigger paws to "oven mitts," with the thumb separated from the other fingers.

Lamar's office confirmed that Disney officials expressed concern about using Tigger's costume in court. Prosecutors said they will not use the costume.

The State Attorney's Office also confirmed that a Disney attorney had sat in on some depositions for witnesses in the case.

In his arrest report, lead investigator Kevin Kraubetz said Chartrand told him he might have "inadvertently" touched the girl's breast. He also noted that Chartrand had apologized and hoped the victim would forgive him.

After Chartrand's arrest, the Orange County Sheriff's Office said it had received about two dozen similar complaints involving guests and alleged groping by cast members. No charges have been filed in those cases, but they remain active investigations, the Sheriff's Office said.

[stiltman]

Least his defense attorneys name isn't Christopher Robins. Now that would of been a real story

[Doramius]

What did he do to be considered molestation. Did he grab the girl's breast. I doubt she has anything, and if she does, Tigger is going to be the last person to do that to a 13 year old. Have you seen those costumes. The thick gloves and the large head make it difficult to feel and see what or who you're touching. I've seen them knock small kids over and grab older girls chests (unintentionally) because they can't see exactly where they place their hands (unless the woman's well endowed). My wife would actually enjoy a groping picture of Tigger from Disney World. One from Mickey, too. There are tons of people that want to sue Disney just to get money. Disney makes huge money, and is geared towards children. It's a primary choice for making a big $$ con. Tons of people have tried to do it.

[Roundabout]

The upshot of all this will probably mean that these "cast members" as they are called, are no longer allowed to come within 3 feet of anyone, lest they be charged with molestation.

How ridiculous.

If this guy really wanted to grope, I don't think he'd be doing it in such a costume where you can't even feel anything. What would be the point? If the gloves are like oven mitts, I know I wouldn't get a "thrill" out of the experience.

Like you guys said, it's all about money, and lots of it. They saw a chance to get some cash out of Disney (serves them right for jacking us on those ticket prices, huh? ) and they took the ball and ran with it. Now they smell blood (money) and others have come out of the woodwork, as so often happens, to get their "share".

[Grimey]

i don't think many kids will be watching the court proceeedings on this case, so i don't think disney has much to worry about.

[Doramius]

The ticket prices are so high probably because everyone's trying to sue them for one thing or another. Did you know that someone tried suing Walt Disney World (I'll try and find a link) just because there were no safety restraints or life preservers on "It's a Small World" and a 5 year old fel into the 3' deep water. This was back in the early 80's. They had seatbelts in the boats for a full year until they made new boats without them. They instead put up signs saying, "keep hands and feet inside...". The case was thrown out for being rediculous and a comment was made that the parents should have been the one on trial for, "allowing their kid to bend over and try and drink the water." I remember hearing parts of this on the news years ago. I might have to find a newspaper archive and post it, if there is no link. The people were suing Disney for $150,000. Not much compared to today's standards.

[indolikaa]

This is payback for Disney putting all their animated films in moratorium for 7-10 years at a time.


Smells like a money-making scheme to me. In both instances...

[Doramius]

I agree. Screw politically correct. I have Song of the South at home and I don't feel it's not watchable by children and it also depicts a certain period of time. Nothing wrong with it at all. I blame Louis Farakan for making Disney feel it's not appropriate. They almost banned Bedknobs & Broomsticks, for depicting witchcraft being used by britts against Nazi's. Follow me boys was re-edited and isn't like the original release. And they removed the cigarette scene from Pecos Bill.

[northcat_8]

What did he do to be considered molestation. Did he grab the girl's breast. I doubt she has anything, and if she does, Tigger is going to be the last person to do that to a 13 year old. Have you seen those costumes. The thick gloves and the large head make it difficult to feel and see what or who you're touching. I've seen them knock small kids over and grab older girls chests (unintentionally) because they can't see exactly where they place their hands (unless the woman's well endowed). My wife would actually enjoy a groping picture of Tigger from Disney World. One from Mickey, too. There are tons of people that want to sue Disney just to get money. Disney makes huge money, and is geared towards children. It's a primary choice for making a big $$ con. Tons of people have tried to do it.

Maybe it's just me Doramius...but I personally have never put that much thought into molesting anything while wearing a tigger outfit, let alone the restrictiveness of those thick gloves

[tekkieman]

Maybe it's just me Doramius...but I personally have never put that much thought into molesting anything while wearing a tigger outfit, let alone the restrictiveness of those thick gloves

And never took a peek under the desks at school either....right northcat?

[northcat_8]

we have open front desks

[tekkieman]

we have open front desks

I know who's name was first on the petition list for that!

[northcat_8]

we have open front desks

I know who's name was first on the petition list for that!

They were already there when I got there....I'm just not complaining

[gshelley61]

I agree. Screw politically correct. I have Song of the South at home and I don't feel it's not watchable by children and it also depicts a certain period of time. Nothing wrong with it at all. I blame Louis Farakan for making Disney feel it's not appropriate. They almost banned Bedknobs & Broomsticks, for depicting witchcraft being used by britts against Nazi's. Follow me boys was re-edited and isn't like the original release. And they removed the cigarette scene from Pecos Bill.

Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah, brother! I agree... Song of the South is mighty satisfactual. I have the Japanese LD and transferred it to DVD-R. Many of my friends have borrowed it to watch it with their kids... no problems at all. Everyone likes the film and finally gets a clue about the Splash Mountain ride at Disney, to boot. It's set in the post-Civil War era. The black actors in the film are therefore not depicting slave life and don't talk or act any different than the cast of Gone With The Wind. In fact, the actress who plays Sis Tempy was also the mammy in Gone With The Wind (and won an Oscar for that role). It's a shame Disney has chosen to mothball this Academy Award winning movie in the name of political correctness.

[JeeDub]

It sure does sound like somebody is trying to make a quick buck by suing somebody with deep pockets again. This is another example of the litigation happy mindset of some people nowadays. What ever happened to personal responsibility and common sense? If you want an eye opening look regarding frivilous lawsuits and PC gone wild, I suggest you look at the Stella Awards at
www.StellaAwards.com
and the sister publication, This is True at
http://www.thisistrue.com.
Both are excellent at revealling just how stupid some people can be . . .

[thayne]

The guy was found not guilty after 1 hour of deliberation...

I hope he sues the parents for damages...

http://www.local6.com/news/3616080/detail.html

[DVD_Ripper]

The guy was found not guilty after 1 hour of deliberation...

I hope he sues the parents for damages...

http://www.local6.com/news/3616080/detail.html

I agree... once, I dressed up for my sons Birthday... you have very limited movement in your arms and you looking through eyeholes that are 4-6 inches away from your face... So when you going to 'hug' a kid, shake their hand... you really can't see what your hands are touching.

Now with this case as a standard its grope city for all the costumed characters down at Wallyworld :P

[handyguy]

He also had dozens of pictures of himself with young females @ home. That's kind of spooky.

[tekkieman]

He also had dozens of pictures of himself with young females @ home. That's kind of spooky.

Yeah, I caught that too! One argument might be that it's for his portfolio for getting another job, but if that were true, then it invalidates his claim that he couldn't be sure if it was him or one of the other "Tiggers". Something definately smells fishy there.

[Doramius]

Meanwhile, Assistant State Attorney William Jay displayed several photos seized from Chartrand's home showing him posing with theme park visitors.

But, Chartrand said he had no way of knowing whether all of the photos showed him or his costumed co-worker.

People can take their own photo, and there's also that person that follows the costumed person that has the digital camera that allows you to go to the front of the park and purchase one for like $80. If someone doesn't purchase the pic, the employees can keep it for scrapbooking or whatever else. It's like that at many theme parks. My wife used to work at some theme parks when she was in and right out of high school. She was Snoopy for 2 months and Knottsberry Farm years ago. She's got like 20 pics that are of her and kids. But she admits, some of them may have been one of the other staff in the suit at times.

[tekkieman]

Valid arguments, Doramius.

[Doramius]

That's probably why the guy was let off from the charges. Heck, the mother of the girl seems to be closer to what we were talking about earlier. I just think it was a way to try and dig into the pockets of Disney. And did it at the cost of emotional instability to her child at the "happiest place on earth". Mighty expensive price.