35 - Anatomy Of An Investigation
image [https://lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXdp5ZLvVOr14PKpwLLQ-Mrgmr8QdvvPCT2cKHwWpfgw7-xdxITwYc605A-8W8N4I15sS6Skokw-LFzefMTA4MeYjZRbLXfl58PEb87x0wWcaFzg_1C2jGN-ca0FUHQAG-AgoAzmSTgjSzOVdWON3manfBBf?key=sk5mDY0KVwUOhjZyNn8dwA]
The "Jurassic Park Discovery Centre" at Universal Studios, Orlando. Credits to David R. Tribble.
Since the very beginning, it was clear that the investigation of Jurassic Park was tackling an epistemological problem.
Before the endorsement team could have a chance to face this issue, however, they needed to be uniformly apprised of the facts on the ground. While the wider definition of acceptable safety standards may prove elusive, the proximate cause of the investigation was straightforward enough.
In the conference room, introductions were made between the endorsement team, and Hammond's three lieutenants. (1)
According to Oak's notes, the endorsement team's questions on de-extinction and the dinosaurs themselves - of which there were many - were kept off the table for the time being, and the briefing remained focused on the incident being investigated.
The only concession made to this was Wu's brief summary of InGen's source for Mesozoic DNA, and the very basics of how this DNA was used to bring the animals back to life.
Muldoon had played a critical part in easing the flow of information. By faxing the report to Oak directly and ahead of the investigation, Muldoon had made sure Oak had time to digest it, and prepare multiple physical copies.
These, Oak now began to hand out to his colleagues, while Muldoon took the floor. As Joger, Crane, and Rodriguez leafed through the report - and the photos therein - with a look of growing shock on their faces, Muldoon explained the fundamental known points of the Morales incident as they were known to InGen at the time.
To briefly recap, these were:
1. The Dakotaraptors' anomalous levels of stress and discomfort, and likely factors that may have contributed to this, such as the relocation from Sorna to Nublar, and possible incorrect assumptions about their etiology and therefore their enclosure needs.
2. The underground stations to operate feeders, and the automation necessitated by the desire to keep staff to a minimum.
3. The malfunctioning of the feeder.
4. The lack of knowledge, by the Costa Rican construction workforce, of the exact nature of the animals housed in the park.
5. Morales sneaking in to take photos of the animals.
6. The breakout of deadly violence among the Dakotaraptors, Morales' fall, and the savage kicks delivered by the euthanised animal while he was on the ground.
7. The emergency airlift, via helicopter, to a hospital on the mainland, and the ultimate passing of Morales.
Muldoon also added that Morales' way into the enclosure remained unknown. (2)
At this point, he left the floor to Harding, who relayed his autopsy report in verbal form. Harding stressed that he hadn't found anything anomalous in his autopsy, but that since it was the very first such autopsy, it was extremely problematic to draw actual, firm conclusions.
In any event, the autopsy didn't find any immediate physical explanation for the raptors' increase in aggression.
Wu then interjected to point out that the cloning of new species was currently halted, and would remain so, pending the conclusion of the investigation.
With this, the basic information pertaining to the Morales incident was finally out in the open. And it was here that, finally, Oak suggested that lunch could now be served. At the grace of their esteemed host, of course. (3)
Counterintuitive as it may seem, Oak knew what he was doing. He'd come to Nublar prepared, but the rest of the team had just undergone a potential information overload, and he wanted to make sure they would have time to digest the information before the investigation proceeded.
Moreover, Oak wanted to minimise the risks that the endorsement team could be swayed by Hammond in their deliberations - or by anyone else in the staff.
This didn't just mean giving his colleagues time to process the content of the briefing: it meant that, together, they would need to determine a structure for the investigation to be carried out, and they would need to be free of influence during that process.
In other words, he wanted a very clear boundary between investigator, and investigated.
As an added benefit, this would severely curtail Hammond's ability to further choreograph the visit. Oak clearly had the measure of the man, and the determination to defuse his theatrics.
After that, lunch was a stilted, somber, awkward affair. To be sure, the staff had done a wonderful job. The food was delicious, the wine was excellent, and the service was impeccable.
But it was also painfully clear that everyone gathered at the table had other things on their mind. The atmosphere between Hammond and his lieutenants was frosty, to say the least, with Hammond interpreting their lack of embellishment in the debrief, as a fundamental unwillingness to fight for the future of his creation.
As for the investigators, they spent as much time writing down questions they had on their personal pads - a suggestion by Crane that had quickly taken hold - as they did eating the food.
After lunch, Nublar's guests were shown to their rooms, on the second floor of the visitors' centre - functional, but still unfurnished beyond the most utilitarian basics. For all its ambitious scope, Jurassic Park was still very much a construction site.
Oak suggested that everyone take the opportunity to refresh, get some rest, and reflect. Each investigator would have some time to study the written reports in more detail, and write down further notes and observations, before reconvening later in the afternoon.
The other members of the endorsement team agreed, and retired to their rooms. After a few quick words with Hammond, Oak did the same.
Oak had successfully bought the time he needed to kickstart the investigation on his terms. For the first time since their arrival on Isla Nublar, the endorsement team would be left alone with their notes - and with their thoughts.
The preliminary briefing had served its purpose, but the real work was yet to begin.
When the team reconvened later that afternoon, Wu, Harding, and Muldoon were not present. This was not a briefing, after all, but a purely formal meeting, where the endorsement team alone had to determine the structure of the investigation it needed to conduct, and formally adopt it.
And here, the epistemological problem that had vexed the whole process since the day of the incident could no longer be ignored. By which definition should Jurassic Park be considered safe or unsafe? Under what relevant quantitative metrics and qualitative judgements? In short, what was the character and scope of the investigation?
To help the team settle this thorny issue, a few firm facts could serve as a useful starting point. Oak, de facto chairing the meeting, listed them.
To begin with, this was not a criminal investigation. It was not being conducted at the behest of a government agency. For that matter, it also wasn't the exercise of an arbitrating third party, accrediting institution, or monitoring body.
It also wasn't a workplace audit internal to InGen. Rather, it was commissioned by the consortium of investors that had been backing the development of Jurassic Park.
For Oak, this clearly defined the mission set before the endorsement team. But, he also said, this inevitably coloured his opinion, and before proceeding with his proposed framework, he thought it opportune to take in the unfiltered opinions of his fellow investigators.
For their part, Joger, Rodriguez and Crane mostly had questions. These ranged from Rodriguez and Joger's technical and biological questions, to Crane's worries about logistics.
More details on cloning, breeding, and how InGen was forming conclusions on the animals' biology and behaviour, were very high on the list, but far from dominating it. What was the basis for the island's emergency evacuation plan? What type of redundancy systems did Jurassic Park have, to ensure that no single point of failure could result in disaster?
How was the park being supplied with food and water, and how was the waste processed? How about fire protection? Protocols for containment failures?
If you stumble upon this tale on Amazon, it's taken without the author's consent. Report it.
All these, and more, were questions that would need answers, but the endorsement team also had to determine how exactly they could contribute to the formulation of an assessment. This particular point worried Rodriguez, most of all.
She pointed out to her colleagues that she had very serious reservations about her presence on the island, and not without reason. From the point of view of a paleontologist, there was no doubt that Jurassic Park represented an incredible opportunity to make discoveries about the evolutionary history of these animals.
The problem was that this had little relevance to the question of whether the park was safe.
Palaeontologists, after all, deal with the evolutionary history of life, and the phylogenetic relationships between organisms - both extant, and extinct. In a sense, they were detectives, reconstructing hypotheses about ancient life in the absence of much information.
But InGen did not have this problem: they had access to the living animals!
Especially when it comes to behaviour - which does not directly fossilise - there is little a palaeontologist could say about an animal, which could not be observed by directly studying the live specimen.
As such, Rodriguez found herself wondering what her role in the proceedings was supposed to be, exactly. She could provide an evolutionary context to the animals on display, but what did this have to do with the investigation at hand? What was she supposed to contribute to the effort of determining whether or not the park was safe? (4)
Oak pushed back against this line of thought.
In his eyes, Rodriguez's presence on the endorsement team was a political necessity, as much as a professional one.
Hammond had selected her as his own representative, and this alone meant that her presence was necessary. On the professional side of the argument, while he could not dismiss her concerns out of hand, it could also not be proven that her contribution would be negligible. When faced with this uncertainty, Oak would have rather erred on the side of caution.
Joger emphatically backed this point. His close personal and professional relationship with Harding notwithstanding, he suspected - correctly - that Jurassic Park was lacking when it came to the ability to systematically study its own animals.
This was no criticism of Harding, but one veterinarian busy reinventing his profession would hardly be sufficient for the prolonged observation and data collection that Joger felt was required of Jurassic Park. (5)
That settled the matter for the time being, though it would crop up again later in the process.
At this point, Crane interjected and asked Oak to better define what, exactly, their clients were looking for. It was well and good to frame the investigation as, ultimately, financial and operational in nature, but what concrete parameters would have to take priority?
To understand Oak's response to this question, it's important to keep context in mind. Workplace fatalities were nothing new to people like him, or Crane, or even Joger. Whether on oil rigs and dams, or in the armed forces, or working with animals, accidents were a fact of life.
Even just sticking to zoos, for which Jurassic Park was at least partially an analogue, it was hardly unheard of for keepers to die in freak accidents and simple distractions.
"Safe" in this context, Oak argued, was a question of the long-term operational viability of the park. Was the Morales incident a fluke of human error, or an indication of systemic dysfunction?
The conclusions of the investigation would therefore be used by the investors to inform their decision of whether or not to continue funding Jurassic Park's development, or cut their losses.
In this regard, Oak proposed a structure for the investigation that he'd been working on since before departure for Isla Nublar, and had been refined after the earlier briefing with Hammond's lieutenants.
Oak's proposal was reviewed collegially, and after intense deliberation, the investigators hammered out the final details of how they would conduct their inquiry.
First, they would begin by personally visiting the Dakotaraptor enclosure. (6)
This was the most time-sensitive piece of the investigation, since there was a real risk of tampering, or evidence decay. They would request Muldoon to escort them, as well as review security footage. Additionally, Harding would guide Joger through an autopsy of one of the expired raptors.
With this phase done, the team would begin taking statements from all relevant staff.
These one-on-one interviews would extend beyond Hammond, Wu, Harding, and Muldoon - although the unmistakable display of tension between Hammond and his lieutenants had given Oak hope that this line of inquiry could prove most fruitful. (7)
Instead, different members of the team would also interview animal handlers, Muldoon's trainee-rangers, geneticists, Morales' construction crew foreman, the emergency response team that flew Morales to the mainland, and others on the ground.
This would allow the investigators to form an idea of the human element of the operation, and any inconsistencies that might become apparent in terms of processes.
In the interest of curating the financial aspect of the proceedings, Oak also thought it a good idea to go over the intended business model, likely cost structure, revenue projections, and long-term viability of Jurassic Park with any relevant personnel on site. (8)
Finally, the team would conduct a thorough physical inspection of the park facilities, including the enclosures, feeding systems, security measures, and other critical infrastructure… and of course, the animals themselves. In other words, a tour. (9)
With the agenda unanimously formalised, the real work of the investigation was, at last, set to begin.
Footnotes:
(1) With the obvious caveat that respectively Muldoon and Crane, and Harding and Joger, knew one another from before InGen already.
(2) And remains unknown to this day, though a few possible routes of ingress were listed earlier in the story.
(3) The glossy presentation, however, remains postponed.
(4) I've always had a bit of a gripe with the assumption that a palaeontologist would be essential to such an endorsement team. It seems to stem from the incorrect belief that palaeontologists would know enough about dinosaur behaviour to survive an encounter with them, or have inherent knowledge on how to properly contain and house these animals.
Now, don't get me wrong. If you're building a Jurassic Park, having a palaeontologist by your side is useful, for a variety of reasons. The idea that is ridiculous to me is, to quote Hammond in the movie, "who better to get the children through Jurassic Park than a dinosaur expert?". That seems really gratuitous to me, especially when most discussions about anything not directly fossilised is inherently speculative.
That said, a few years ago, Italian palaeontologist Andrea Cau made an interesting post, querying his readers about how they would try to survive an encounter with a Tyrannosaurus rex in the wild, before eventually weighing in himself at the end of the discussion. I had a lot of fun going through that discussion, and it also gave me an idea for a suggestion Rodriguez will be putting forward during the investigation. Beyond that idea though, I look forward to presenting a summary of that discussion to you in a future chapter, maybe as a special footnote or a separate threadmark. We'll see!
(5) This was, after all, one of the early tensions that caused so many problems for Jurassic Park: the conflict between the imperative of secrecy, and the park's constant hunger for multidisciplinary know-how. This is one problem that you can expect to get better over time eventually, at least, which is not something you can say very often.
(6) Once again, if you remove the rose-tinted entertainment glasses and step back for a second, it's kind of surprising that both in the book and movie, the investigation really just feels like a deluxe tour. Hammond completely dictates the agenda - until the disaster, of course - from start to finish. To a minor extent in the movie, and a larger extent in the book, Grant, Malcolm & co do get to look under the hood, so to speak, but they don't really do much vigorous investigating of their own.
(7) The transcripts are also an invaluable historical source. In-universe, you can imagine the early chapters of this "book" owing a lot to those interviews and their contents.
(8) Which is to say, with Hammond. Blimey.
(9) Because obviously we're still getting a tour! I'm not a monster! :D