PDA

View Full Version : Cheaper by the Dozen


arielilane
09-18-2011, 09:30 PM
Dailymotion - Cheaper by the Dozen _ Swing From Chandelier - a Life & Style video

Dawna Kauffman made an excellent point on WS radio tonight about this movie.

Was this movie shown in the S household? Did it influence MS?


Tom Welling Behind Cheaper by the Dozen - YouTube

jjenny
09-18-2011, 09:51 PM
That's not the only movie where people are shown swinging on chandeliers. I was watching a tv series for children a couple of weeks ago and that show had 3 people swinging on a chandelier.

Curious Me
09-18-2011, 09:52 PM
Oh heavens, yes, this movie scene is so close to what might have happened! It isn't the least bit cute now, which it was meant to be. Did MS ever see this movie?

SunnieRN
09-18-2011, 09:56 PM
I loved that movie. There is no way to know if Max saw the movie, unless a family member tells us.

Curious Me
09-18-2011, 09:58 PM
That's not the only movie where people are shown swinging on chandeliers. I was watching a tv series for children a couple of weeks ago and that show had 3 people swinging on a chandelier.

I remember you mentioning that. Doesn't the stairway in this movie scene look similar enough to give you chills? Horrible accident.

CDS22
09-18-2011, 10:02 PM
Even if MS saw the movie, it doesn't mean he emulated it.

CocoChanel
09-18-2011, 10:24 PM
Even if MS saw the movie, it doesn't mean he emulated it.

I agree. I think I can probably speak for all of us posting here when I say that if it can be proved that Max saw this movie, we agree that alone does not prove that he was copying it when he had the accident.

Can you agree that, under the same circumstances, if it could be proved that Max saw this movie, there is then a POSSIBILITY that he might be intrigued enough to try to copy it, in which case it could explain this accident?

SophieRose
09-18-2011, 10:35 PM
I agree. I think I can probably speak for all of us posting here when I say that if it can be proved that Max saw this movie, we agree that alone does not prove that he was copying it when he had the accident.

Can you agree that, under the same circumstances, if it could be proved that Max saw this movie, there is then a POSSIBILITY that he might be intrigued enough to try to copy it, in which case it could explain this accident?

So if you think he copied it, are you saying he used the scooter. The movie had hardwood floors where one could speed up to swing over, the Spreckels mansion is carpeted.

KarenM
09-18-2011, 11:33 PM
I actually thought about this chandelier theory before. It was possible but the scooter could not fit in the scenario. The scooter was so hard to explain that even the LE left it out of the demo picture.

Based on the AR, Max must have landed face down. His face hit the ground so hard, causing his head to turn up violently and his spinal cord to be unplugged from his brain stem. But when LE arrived, he was lying face up. I think Rebecca turned him over to check on him and gave him CPR. This was very natural, nothing suspicious to me. If you see your child lying face down and unreponsive, wouldn't you immediately turn him/her over to check on him/her? The AR also mentioned that Rebecca could not remember whether Max was facing up or down when she first saw him and whether she turned him over. Combining this with the AR's description on Max's injury, it only makes sense that Max landed face down. So the interesting question was the scooter. No matter the scooter flew down with Max and landed on him or the scooter was on the first floor to begin with and fell on him during the impact, when Rebecca turned him over, the scooter should be moved out of the way or slipped out of the way. Why was it found to be on the Max's leg?

We probably will never find out what happened to Max that day. There were too many possibilities. Rebecca could have told complete truth based on what she knew. It was also possible that she did not mention a few things either unintentionally or intentionally. Some items at the scene could be placed there aferwards (such as the scooter). Even if the scooter was laid out on Max later, it does not necessarily indicate foul play. It might simply be someone needed a more convincing explanation to LE and the kid's parents. These are just pure speculation, of course.

One thing I don't believe is that RN purposely harmed Max. She had no motivation doing that because Max's injury under her care would do no good to her but making her life miserable, regardless whether she was responsible for his injury or not. With the relationship she had with JS's ex, she knew she'd have a hard time with the explanation.

I also thought of the possiblity that Xena was playing with Max and got injured in the accident also. Her injury on the leg required stitches from what I read. Only wounds too deep to heal naturally require stitches. If her wound was acquired when picking up the broken chanderlier, it was more likely to be on her hand and a superficial cut. Of course, these are also my wild guesses.

RIP, Max. I also want to say his parents' decision to donate his organs was very respectable and generous.

CocoChanel
09-18-2011, 11:44 PM
So if you think he copied it, are you saying he used the scooter. The movie had hardwood floors where one could speed up to swing over, the Spreckels mansion is carpeted.

I do not think MS copied this particular movie scene because I don't know if he ever saw this movie. If he did see it, then I would say it was POSSIBLE that he could have tried something he saw in the movie involving a chandelier. I personally do not think the scooter went over the railing with MS. I think it was on the first floor near where MS landed.

katydid23
09-18-2011, 11:55 PM
I don't think Max would have suddenly jumped to swing on the chandelier. He was reportedly a very intelligent, and athletic kid. I think he was plenty old enough and smart enough about gravity to prevent himself from attempting a swing on the chandelier.

The planking I could understand a little more, if he saw older sibs trying it, and if he thought he could easily stay balanced upon the rail. But the planking theory does not fit with the way his body supposedly was propelled over the top.

The scooter could not go that fast on a carpet, imo. And I see no way that it would have gone over the rail itself. Scooters are bottom heavy. It would have to have been going very fast for awhile to make it over the rail. imoo

The scenario of him running fast and missing the top step for some reason and then falling over the rail makes the most sense, I suppose.

In terms of the 'physical' outcome, it appears most likely he was thrown over the balcony, if you just take into account what LE described was the way the body fell.
But I cannot come up with any believable scenario in which anyone would have thrown that poor sweet boy over the railing. So I am going to assume that did not happen.

jjenny
09-18-2011, 11:57 PM
Children do imitate what they see in the movies. Doesn't matter how intelligent they are. Children are very impressionable and might not understand the dangers of doing something somebody did in a move. Now, I have no idea if Max tried to imitate something he saw in a movie, but that's not out of the question.

katydid23
09-19-2011, 12:01 AM
Children do imitate what they see in the movies. Doesn't matter how intelligent they are. Children are very impressionable and might not understand the dangers of doing something somebody did in a move. Now, I have no idea if Max tried to imitate something he saw in a movie, but that's not out of the question.

I understand how impressionable they are. But it was breakfast time, on a normal morning, and his stepmom was just in the bathroom. What would compel him to suddenly, out of the blue, decide to take a swing on the chandelier? I just don't buy it. He was a smart kid. He would understand how dangerous that was. He was old enough to understand gravity and pain, imo.
So imo, it does matter how intelligent they are. An intelligent child WOULD understand the dangers involved in trying to swing on a chandelier two flights down. imoo.

jjenny
09-19-2011, 12:04 AM
He is also only six. I don't care how intelligent he might be. The child's brain isn't as developed as an adult's, and the child might not understand the danger of doing something an adult would understand. I don't know if he saw the movie but in the movie it looked like fun and no one got injured.

katydid23
09-19-2011, 12:10 AM
He is also only six. I don't care how intelligent he might be. The child's brain isn't as developed as an adult's, and the child might not understand the danger of doing something an adult would understand.

Six year old are pretty smart already in terms of what they can and cannot do in terms of heights. They play on monkey bars and climb on really high slides, and very very few of them will just purposely jump from a very high place without understanding the consequences.

I think you could take a hundred first graders into that home, one by one,stand at the top of the stairs,and ask each child if they think they should try to swing on that chandelier. I don't think many of them would think it was possible to do without being hurt. imoo

jjenny
09-19-2011, 12:22 AM
Accidents are a leading cause of death in children. If all children were so cautious as you apparently think, I really don't think it would have been the case.

Melanie
09-19-2011, 12:32 AM
It also reminds me of War of the Roses with Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner - where the husband and wife die after falling on the chandelier. Sorry if that's a spoiler for anyone, but it's been out forever!

Poor Max :(

Mel

katydid23
09-19-2011, 12:39 AM
Accidents are a leading cause of death in children. If all children were so cautious as you apparently think, I really don't think it would have been the case.

There is a big difference between an 'accident', like a kid stumbling and falling from a bunk bed, or falling from their tree house, and a kid jumping on purpose from a very high dangerous place. imoo

Even impressionable, clumsy, six year olds know what is safe and what is not. Sure, they are rambunctious and impulsive, and they may try something beyond their abilities. But I think most 6 yr olds know that it is dangerous and stupid to try and jump on a chandelier from the second story of their home. imoo

SunnieRN
09-19-2011, 01:34 AM
I don't think Max would have suddenly jumped to swing on the chandelier. He was reportedly a very intelligent, and athletic kid. I think he was plenty old enough and smart enough about gravity to prevent himself from attempting a swing on the chandelier.

The planking I could understand a little more, if he saw older sibs trying it, and if he thought he could easily stay balanced upon the rail. But the planking theory does not fit with the way his body supposedly was propelled over the top.

The scooter could not go that fast on a carpet, imo. And I see no way that it would have gone over the rail itself. Scooters are bottom heavy. It would have to have been going very fast for awhile to make it over the rail. imoo

The scenario of him running fast and missing the top step for some reason and then falling over the rail makes the most sense, I suppose.

In terms of the 'physical' outcome, it appears most likely he was thrown over the balcony, if you just take into account what LE described was the way the body fell.
But I cannot come up with any believable scenario in which anyone would have thrown that poor sweet boy over the railing. So I am going to assume that did not happen.

Six year old are pretty smart already in terms of what they can and cannot do in terms of heights. They play on monkey bars and climb on really high slides, and very very few of them will just purposely jump from a very high place without understanding the consequences.

I think you could take a hundred first graders into that home, one by one,stand at the top of the stairs,and ask each child if they think they should try to swing on that chandelier. I don't think many of them would think it was possible to do without being hurt. imoo

There is a big difference between an 'accident', like a kid stumbling and falling from a bunk bed, or falling from their tree house, and a kid jumping on purpose from a very high dangerous place. imoo

Even impressionable, clumsy, six year olds know what is safe and what is not. Sure, they are rambunctious and impulsive, and they may try something beyond their abilities. But I think most 6 yr olds know that it is dangerous and stupid to try and jump on a chandelier from the second story of their home. imoo

Not trying to pick on you Katy, it's just that I have heard you say in the past, that maybe Rebecca didn't supervise Max closely enough that day. All of the posts you have made in this thread, sound more like you feel that Max was old enough to understand what was safe and what was dangerous, (which I agree with to a point, because most 6 years olds still believe in fantasy and can not understand consequences to their actions yet).

I am curious if your opinion of Rebecca's ability to supervise Max have changed?

lauriej
09-19-2011, 03:42 AM
I don't think Max would have suddenly jumped to swing on the chandelier. He was reportedly a very intelligent, and athletic kid. I think he was plenty old enough and smart enough about gravity to prevent himself from attempting a swing on the chandelier.

The planking I could understand a little more, if he saw older sibs trying it, and if he thought he could easily stay balanced upon the rail. But the planking theory does not fit with the way his body supposedly was propelled over the top.

The scooter could not go that fast on a carpet, imo. And I see no way that it would have gone over the rail itself. Scooters are bottom heavy. It would have to have been going very fast for awhile to make it over the rail. imoo

The scenario of him running fast and missing the top step for some reason and then falling over the rail makes the most sense, I suppose.

In terms of the 'physical' outcome, it appears most likely he was thrown over the balcony, if you just take into account what LE described was the way the body fell.
But I cannot come up with any believable scenario in which anyone would have thrown that poor sweet boy over the railing. So I am going to assume that did not happen.

..i have no idea how maxie's accident occurred---but i do think it was an unfortunate accident.

..we know the chandelier factors in somewhere-------b/c in the AR it's mentioned that paramedics find it sitting there right next to him.

..as far as theories "not fitting" with the way the body fell---or "taking into account what LE described" ------LE put together a ( very brief, child tumbling ) power point for the PC------which, was horribly inaccurate.

..val of THM actually uses the data----proving how LE's brief little presentation ---was seriously lacking.

( why LE showed "a kid" simply running and falling---without factoring in the height of the kid, the railing etc????-----is bizarre.)

http://www.thehinkymeter.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=1344
---how max's accident----DIDN'T happen-----

Truthwillsetufree
09-19-2011, 04:44 AM
I haven't been following this case but was reading the last few pages and getting up to speed on things and I have a tid bit to share...
My step Grandson is 6 and is a very intelligient, athletic child. While sitting around the other day he told me in front of his parents and other family members that he got on the roof of his house and jumped into their pool. (Their home is a one story house) For about 5 seconds I believed him until his Dad said, "Boy you know you didn't do that" and Grandson kept arguing with his Dad that he did and then finally said no, he didn't do it then but that he was going to. Come to find out from my DD that he has told other people he has done this. What is in the mind of a 6 year old, I don't know. I would have thought the same as some others that 6 year olds have the intelligence to know that swinging from chandeliers or jumping from roofs into pools is dangerous and one might get hurt but after the conversation with the Grandson, I know that is just not the case.
(They have now added a door alarm to alert them if the back door is opened)

CDS22
09-19-2011, 08:26 AM
I don't think Max would have suddenly jumped to swing on the chandelier. He was reportedly a very intelligent, and athletic kid. I think he was plenty old enough and smart enough about gravity to prevent himself from attempting a swing on the chandelier.

The planking I could understand a little more, if he saw older sibs trying it, and if he thought he could easily stay balanced upon the rail. But the planking theory does not fit with the way his body supposedly was propelled over the top.

The scooter could not go that fast on a carpet, imo. And I see no way that it would have gone over the rail itself. Scooters are bottom heavy. It would have to have been going very fast for awhile to make it over the rail. imoo

The scenario of him running fast and missing the top step for some reason and then falling over the rail makes the most sense, I suppose.

In terms of the 'physical' outcome, it appears most likely he was thrown over the balcony, if you just take into account what LE described was the way the body fell.
But I cannot come up with any believable scenario in which anyone would have thrown that poor sweet boy over the railing. So I am going to assume that did not happen.

People do things all the time that none of us can imagine, so I won't rule out someone intentionally hurting MS, because people hurt and even kill children far too often. However, I don't think the evidence points towards someone intentionally harming him. I do think the evidence points towards someone or someone(s) not being truthful about the accident because they were protecting themselves. I also wonder how quickly help was called to the mansion.

There is also the possibility that someone else saw the movie and thought they'd stage an accident complete with a scooter across the leg. Not saying that happened, just that it's in the realm of possibility.

IMO

CDS22
09-19-2011, 08:28 AM
..i have no idea how maxie's accident occurred---but i do think it was an unfortunate accident.

..we know the chandelier factors in somewhere-------b/c in the AR it's mentioned that paramedics find it sitting there right next to him.

..as far as theories "not fitting" with the way the body fell---or "taking into account what LE described" ------LE put together a ( very brief, child tumbling ) power point for the PC------which, was horribly inaccurate.

..val of THM actually uses the data----proving how LE's brief little presentation ---was seriously lacking.

( why LE showed "a kid" simply running and falling---without factoring in the height of the kid, the railing etc????-----is bizarre.)

http://www.thehinkymeter.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=1344
---how max's accident----DIDN'T happen-----

If he fell on or through the chandelier, or if it fell on him, it wouldn't be laying right next to him. That's why I think his accident scene was staged.

IMO

SunnieRN
09-19-2011, 12:19 PM
How could someone stage an accident with a chandelier, without being harmed themselves?

Brit
09-19-2011, 12:27 PM
People do things all the time that none of us can imagine, so I won't rule out someone intentionally hurting MS, because people hurt and even kill children far too often. However, I don't think the evidence points towards someone intentionally harming him. I do think the evidence points towards someone or someone(s) not being truthful about the accident because they were protecting themselves. I also wonder how quickly help was called to the mansion.

There is also the possibility that someone else saw the movie and thought they'd stage an accident complete with a scooter across the leg. Not saying that happened, just that it's in the realm of possibility.

IMO


In my opinion, someone could have just as likely been trying to protect someone else. There have been varying reports on who was even home at the time of the accident.

CDS22
09-19-2011, 12:35 PM
In my opinion, someone could have just as likely been trying to protect someone else. There have been varying reports on who was even home at the time of the accident.

It's pretty easy to verify if everyone was where they said they were. It's also pretty easy to verify who else received injuries the day MS was fatally injured.

justice be served
09-19-2011, 02:04 PM
In my opinion, someone could have just as likely been trying to protect someone else. There have been varying reports on who was even home at the time of the accident.

Yes, Brit, I am so on the same wave length as you. :clap:

Morag
09-19-2011, 02:56 PM
I haven't been following this case but was reading the last few pages and getting up to speed on things and I have a tid bit to share...
My step Grandson is 6 and is a very intelligient, athletic child. While sitting around the other day he told me in front of his parents and other family members that he got on the roof of his house and jumped into their pool. (Their home is a one story house) For about 5 seconds I believed him until his Dad said, "Boy you know you didn't do that" and Grandson kept arguing with his Dad that he did and then finally said no, he didn't do it then but that he was going to. Come to find out from my DD that he has told other people he has done this. What is in the mind of a 6 year old, I don't know. I would have thought the same as some others that 6 year olds have the intelligence to know that swinging from chandeliers or jumping from roofs into pools is dangerous and one might get hurt but after the conversation with the Grandson, I know that is just not the case.
(They have now added a door alarm to alert them if the back door is opened)

Hey, I jumped from the top of a friend's rabbit hutch when I was 6! And my DH jumped from the neighbor's garage roof at about the same age. The young neighbor broke his arm on the next jump. And our current neighbor, now a teen, jumped from the top of a granite cliff-in our front yard- about a minute after I said, don't do that, Elvis, you'll break your ankle. He broke his ankle. Kids do things that they theoretically know better than to do.

CDS22
09-19-2011, 03:10 PM
Hey, I jumped from the top of a friend's rabbit hutch when I was 6! And my DH jumped from the neighbor's garage roof at about the same age. The young neighbor broke his arm on the next jump. And our current neighbor, now a teen, jumped from the top of a granite cliff-in our front yard- about a minute after I said, don't do that, Elvis, you'll break your ankle. He broke his ankle. Kids do things that they theoretically know better than to do.

That's why they need to be supervised constantly, and why it's not wise to spend an alleged 20 minutes in the bathroom putting on eye shadow or whatever.

JMO

Rhyme & Reason
09-19-2011, 04:48 PM
Websleuths is a victim friendly forum..

Melanie
09-19-2011, 05:07 PM
I'm still having a hard time figuring out how the chandelier comes into play, and that's why I haven't posted much (I'm just perplexed by this whole event). If Maxie brought that chandelier down with him, I would think he would have to fall "up and out" if that makes any sense.

How does one grab onto a a chandelier whilst falling - especially a small 6 year old? I haven't read how far the chandelier is from the railing, but assume it's probably several feet.

Was this an intentional act? I can't wrap my head around a 6 year old jumping and grabbing the chandelier on purpose? I also can't see him falling and being able to grab it either. Planking means your head is horizontal, and he would have to raise his head and almost turn verticle in order to grab it.

Or he was vertical and jumped, whilst trying to grab the chandelier.

So what position was he in when he fell -- has that ever been determined?

Sorry if this has been asked and answered, but there are so many threads on this case, I simply haven't been able to weed through all of them.

Thanks,

Mel

Melanie
09-19-2011, 05:14 PM
That's why they need to be supervised constantly, and why it's not wise to spend an alleged 20 minutes in the bathroom putting on eye shadow or whatever.

JMO

I beg to respectully differ. I have a now 14 year old, and when he was 6 he was certainly able to spend time alone while I showered, got ready, talked on the phone, or surfed the internet.

A child that is school ready does not have to be supervised constantly, in which I assume would mean "eyes on them at all times". If this is not the intent of your response, my apologies.

I understand the need to monitor our children quite closely, but at the age of 6 a child should know the dangers of a staircase (vs. say a 2 -4 year old). My son was already in Kindergarten, and managed our staircase quite well. He knew it wasn't a place to play (ie, slide down the stairs, etc).

Personally, I cannot blame RZ on Maxie's accident because she was in the bathroom. Millions of parents do this everyday with their 6 year olds.

Again, JMHO.

Thanks,

Mel

CDS22
09-19-2011, 05:40 PM
I'm still having a hard time figuring out how the chandelier comes into play, and that's why I haven't posted much (I'm just perplexed by this whole event). If Maxie brought that chandelier down with him, I would think he would have to fall "up and out" if that makes any sense.

How does one grab onto a a chandelier whilst falling - especially a small 6 year old? I haven't read how far the chandelier is from the railing, but assume it's probably several feet.

Was this an intentional act? I can't wrap my head around a 6 year old jumping and grabbing the chandelier on purpose? I also can't see him falling and being able to grab it either. Planking means your head is horizontal, and he would have to raise his head and almost turn verticle in order to grab it.

Or he was vertical and jumped, whilst trying to grab the chandelier.

So what position was he in when he fell -- has that ever been determined?

Sorry if this has been asked and answered, but there are so many threads on this case, I simply haven't been able to weed through all of them.

Thanks,

Mel

No one can figure it out, nor has any plausible explanation been offered.

That's been my problem with this case as well.

I've often wondered if someone knocked the chandelier down on MS. You know, perhaps if an older child were planking and fell on him while he was quietly playing down below, or if someone were cleaning the chandelier and dropped it on him accidentally. But that's mere speculation. None of it makes sense, particuarly when you read the AR and see the extensive amount of injuries on his body.

CDS22
09-19-2011, 06:22 PM
I beg to respectully differ. I have a now 14 year old, and when he was 6 he was certainly able to spend time alone while I showered, got ready, talked on the phone, or surfed the internet.

A child that is school ready does not have to be supervised constantly, in which I assume would mean "eyes on them at all times". If this is not the intent of your response, my apologies.

I understand the need to monitor our children quite closely, but at the age of 6 a child should know the dangers of a staircase (vs. say a 2 -4 year old). My son was already in Kindergarten, and managed our staircase quite well. He knew it wasn't a place to play (ie, slide down the stairs, etc).

Personally, I cannot blame RZ on Maxie's accident because she was in the bathroom. Millions of parents do this everyday with their 6 year olds.

Again, JMHO.

Thanks,

Mel

I appreciate what you've said, and also how respectfully you've said it.

I know what you mean about a child being in another room, or a parent being in another room, from time to time. We don't want to hover over our children. At the same time, I find it highly suspicious that neither RZ nor XZ had any idea where little Max was when his accident occured. As a parent, don't you kind of have an idea where they are? You can hear if they're in the shower, you can tell by footsteps if they're running, you can hear the refrigerator open if they're in the kitchen getting a snack.

RZ claimed to be in the bathroom that is right behind the stairs when MS's injuries occurred, yet she says she last saw him in the kitchen and doesn't know how he got injured and didn't hear a thing til she heard one crash. How in the world could a young child be doing something to gain the type of velocity he had to have had at the time of the accident to garner such a severe type of whiplash that he died from it? It boggles the mind.

arielilane
09-19-2011, 09:04 PM
That's not the only movie where people are shown swinging on chandeliers. I was watching a tv series for children a couple of weeks ago and that show had 3 people swinging on a chandelier.
Thank you, jjenny. Please feel free to post links to other movies (anyone else, as well) of videos involving swinging on a chandelier that may shed some light on how Max's accident was possible. Were any of these movies watched by Max? That is a question we may never know.

arielilane
09-29-2012, 05:17 PM
The video scene from Cheaper by the Dozen swinging from the chandelier appears to have been removed from You Tube.:waitasec: