pro-captivity-deactivated201302 asked: Well he also could have been the cause of an altercation. Just because he was the one injured doesn't mean he was the one fleeing. In an altercation, both animals are swimming fast and taking sharp turns. So yes, he could have been the victim, but he very well could have been the instigator. It makes no sense to just assume he was the one fleeing. Let's learn from history. What happened in Kandu V's case? Kandu was the one severely damaged after the altercation but was NOT the one fleeing.
Fair point. I was making no judgement on who caused or instigated the altercation (and from what I know I don’t think even SeaWorld has a view on that). The only important point was that there was an altercation that seems to have been the proximate cause of the wound.
As for fleeing, it’s true that Nakai could have been injured before he split to the back pool. But most folks I have spoken to believe that if he was injured by bumping into something in the pool with a hard enough edge to create that wound, it was likely in the channel to the back pool, as he was splitting, which has edges as well as the various underwater components of the gating system. No one can think of a place in the show pool that would create that sort of injury.
Doesn’t mean that he didn’t get injured out in the main pool during the altercation. But apart from the fatc that there was an altercation we are dealing with speculation (hopefully informed).