IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #3

[jeena]

If they last that long I will be surprised. The statistics of divorce when a child dies or becomes disabled are astronomical.

I compared this previously to the little boy who died at Disneyworld, by an alligator attack. He was the same age as Chloe.

There was no lawsuit. Disney offered a hefty settlement to not have the words, "Disney Alligator Attack" in the media, constantly associating "Disney" with "alligator attack".

I have no doubt that the goal here was similar. The main difference is that this did not seem to be as egregious as having family outdoor movie time, right next to a pond filled with alligators, at dusk, when they feed...

A guard rail, 18 inches away from the window seems exceptionally secured. Unless someone deliberately bypasses the safety rail...

I used to live in Orlando and I hate to think of all the times I was in that alligator infested water on small boats or walked close to the edge near the Grand Floridian where that little boy died. I knew that being close to any body of water is dangerous in Florida due to gators, but in the back of my mind I thought Disney kept them out of that lagoon somehow, stupid me! There is a u-tube video of a gator being a few feet from a ride in Disney World, and a park worker was trying to get the gator away from the area!

 

[sl222]

On this page you can enter a large amount of text in Spanish and it will translate it.
spanish to english translation google - بحث Google

 

[katydid23]

I'm confused about one point - this is a misdemeanor charge? I thought it was "negligent homicide."

Also, I have searched here regularly and it's helpful. Your browser will translate it most likely. Search

Now they use FB Plugin and the comments are not translated but those of you who speak Spanish can let us know of anything worth knowing from them. The previous translated comments, no longer there, were very informative. One person said he had seen SA on land after the accident and stated that he looks like a drinker; on DM a nurse also commented that she knows the effects of drinkers by looking at a person and that's what she saw in SA. I would not be surprised if he was also a pot smoker but I'm not making an accusation since so far that's never come into the record. Where was he shortly before Mrs. Wiegand had to go on her errand and he was asked to watch Chloe - laying down in the room after their meal? (Pure speculation) A person like him, weight 275 (see image) but only 51, is probably tired a lot of the day. Chloe was said by Winkleman on CBS to have "run" to the windows with SA following behind. Being out in the hot sun in the play area, etc., watching a toddler could be also tiring.

I was annoyed with Winkleman's term "helicopter grandparenting" because that's mandatory with an 18-month-old - watching them and hovering to make sure they are safe.

"I was annoyed with Winkleman's term "helicopter grandparenting" because that's mandatory with an 18-month-old - watching them and hovering to make sure they are safe."


I totally agree ^^^thAt the term "helicopter grandparenting" is annoying when used for watching toddlers on a cruise liner. How could one not 'be a helicopter' when an 18 month old is toddling around on a crowded ship out at sea? Stairs, pools, elevators, crowds, drunk people, hot coffee, balconies, etc etc....

 

[jeena]

I noticed in the last photo of CW by the pool there were water marks right next to her on the ground. She must have been dripping wet and slippery, and to top it off, SA stands her on the railing with no support, wet water shoes on! If there was a breeze coming from that open window, maybe CW was cold from being wet and got out of his loose grip because she was uncomfortable. We know from photos that SA didn't hold her in a safe manner. MW is trying to blame the victim, imo, by saying SA didn't drop her, she fell out. No, if she got out of his loose grip, he dropped her. KW is telling everyone to be kind to honor CW's birthday on Friday, how about being kind to your daughter and stop your lawyer from implying CW caused her own death?

 

[al66pine]

PR Crim Charges against G'pa-SA

I'm confused about one point - this is a misdemeanor charge? I thought it was "negligent homicide."....

@sl222 sbm Agreeing it seems unusual that a crime resulting in death is a misdemeanor. Below is what I located in English, translated from PR statutes in Spanish.* Not something I translated w an app. Posting this, I invite anyone to dig in for other info re the statute, to correct or clarify.

Briefly ---
Per PR statute "Negligent Homicide" is classified as a misdemeanor, but the penalty is same as for a 4th degree felony, essentially 6 mo. to 3 yrs imprisonment, and parole eligibility after serving half of sentence.

Not quite so briefly, the statutes ---
"§ 4737. Negligent homicide
Any person who causes the death of another through negligence shall incur a misdemeanor, but shall receive the penalty established for a fourth degree felony...."*

"§ 4694. Applicable penalties
"(e) Fourth degree felony. — Entails a punishment of imprisonment for a fixed term in natural years which shall not be less than six (6) months and one (1) day, nor more than three (3) years. In such case, the person may be considered for parole by the Parole Board upon having served fifty percent (50%) of the term of imprisonment imposed.". bbm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* from Laws of Puerto Rico Annotated, 33 L.P.R.A. § 4737
See also
Laws of Puerto Rico Annotated
TITLE THIRTY-THREE Penal Code
Subtitle 5 Penal Code of 2004—Special Provisions
PART I. Crimes Against the Person
Chapter 297. Crimes Against Life
Subchapter I. Murder and Homicide

 

[jeena]

Maybe the Wiegands should get a small settlement (half-million or so) as a good will gesture from RCCL since the tragedy happened on their ship, even if MW loses the case. Seems like the right thing to do for all their suffering that will never end, even though SA is really to blame.

 

[sl222]

PR Crim Charges against G'pa-SA
@sl222 sbm
Below is what I located in English.* Posting this, I invite anyone to dig in for other info re the statute, to correct or clarify.

Briefly ---
Per PR statute "Negligent Homicide" is classified as a misdemeanor, but the penalty is same as for a 4th degree felony, essentially 6 mo. to 3 yrs imprisonment, and parole eligibility after serving half of sentence.

Not quite so briefly, the statutes ---
"§ 4737. Negligent homicide
Any person who causes the death of another through negligence shall incur a misdemeanor, but shall receive the penalty established for a fourth degree felony...."*

"§ 4694. Applicable penalties
"(e) Fourth degree felony. — Entails a punishment of imprisonment for a fixed term in natural years which shall not be less than six (6) months and one (1) day, nor more than three (3) years. In such case, the person may be considered for parole by the Parole Board upon having served fifty percent (50%) of the term of imprisonment imposed.". bbm.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* from Laws of Puerto Rico Annotated, 33 L.P.R.A. § 4737
See also
Laws of Puerto Rico Annotated

TITLE THIRTY-THREE Penal Code
Subtitle 5 Penal Code of 2004—Special Provisions

PART I. Crimes Against the Person

Chapter 297. Crimes Against Life

Subchapter I. Murder and Homicide

Thank you very much, al66pine!

 

[MassGuy]

Maybe the Wiegands should get a small settlement (half-million or so) as a good will gesture from RCCL since the tragedy happened on their ship, even if MW loses the case. Seems like the right thing to do for all their suffering that will never end, even though SA is really to blame.

I hope for the opposite, and don’t want them to see a penny.

This family was partaking in a safe activity, and doing so on a ship that was keeping up its end of the deal (keeping passengers safe).

Due to no fault of Royal Caribbean, a child died. If the parents sue anyone, it should be the man who negligently killed their daughter.

He is solely to blame for this.

Royal Caribbean is a business, not a charity. And paying off people who have filed a frivolous and misguided lawsuit, may not be a sound business decision.

I think this proceeds forward, and will ultimately be dismissed. As it should be.

ETA: This quote really grinds my gears.

Anello told CBS News he initially blamed himself for Chloe's death. Now, he blames the cruise line.

"I just want them to fix the boat. Just fix it. Just fix the boat."

The family whose toddler fell to her death from a Royal Caribbean cruise ship sues the company - CNN

 

[Seattle1]

I'm confused about one point - this is a misdemeanor charge? I thought it was "negligent homicide."

^^sbm

2019-02-21 00:00:00+00
§ 4737. Negligent homicide

Any person who causes the death of another through negligence shall incur a misdemeanor, but shall receive the penalty established for a fourth degree felony.

§ 4737. Negligent homicide, P.R. Laws tit. 33, § 4737 | Casetext

 

[jeena]

I hope for the opposite, and don’t want them to see a penny.

This family was partaking in a safe activity, and doing so on a ship that was keeping up its end of the deal (keeping passengers safe).

Due to no fault of Royal Caribbean, a child died. If the parents sue anyone, it should be the man who negligently killed their daughter.

He is solely to blame for this.

Royal Caribbean is a business, not a charity. And paying off people who have filed a frivolous and misguided lawsuit, may not be a sound business decision.

I think this proceeds forward, and will ultimately be dismissed. As it should be.

ETA: This quote really grinds my gears.

Anello told CBS News he initially blamed himself for Chloe's death. Now, he blames the cruise line.

"I just want them to fix the boat. Just fix it. Just fix the boat."

The family whose toddler fell to her death from a Royal Caribbean cruise ship sues the company - CNN

Good points! You are correct. Trying to alleviate the Wiegands suffering a bit doesn't lie with RCCL, they did nothing wrong and are getting sued besides.

 

[jeena]

I hope for the opposite, and don’t want them to see a penny.

This family was partaking in a safe activity, and doing so on a ship that was keeping up its end of the deal (keeping passengers safe).

Due to no fault of Royal Caribbean, a child died. If the parents sue anyone, it should be the man who negligently killed their daughter.

He is solely to blame for this.

Royal Caribbean is a business, not a charity. And paying off people who have filed a frivolous and misguided lawsuit, may not be a sound business decision.

I think this proceeds forward, and will ultimately be dismissed. As it should be.

ETA: This quote really grinds my gears.

Anello told CBS News he initially blamed himself for Chloe's death. Now, he blames the cruise line.

"I just want them to fix the boat. Just fix it. Just fix the boat."

The family whose toddler fell to her death from a Royal Caribbean cruise ship sues the company - CNN

Good points! You are correct. Trying to alleviate the Wiegands suffering a bit doesn't lie with RCCL, they did nothing wrong and are getting sued besides.

 

[sl222]

^^sbm

2019-02-21 00:00:00+00
§ 4737. Negligent homicide

Any person who causes the death of another through negligence shall incur a misdemeanor, but shall receive the penalty established for a fourth degree felony.

§ 4737. Negligent homicide, P.R. Laws tit. 33, § 4737 | Casetext

Thank you. It really jumped out at me that in the press conference today I recall Mrs. Wiegand saying this was "just a misdemeanor" so why should he be charged (something along those lines). Glad the penalty is felony-serious.

 

[Seattle1]

Thank you. It really jumped out at me that in the press conference today I recall Mrs. Wiegand saying this was "just a misdemeanor" so why should he be charged (something along those lines). Glad the penalty is felony-serious.

A couple of years ago I recall another poster told me negligence is almost always a misdemeanor except for gross negligence which means malice. Another clue is the maximum penalty is only 3 years. Personally, I think manslaughter is easier to understand.

 

[MassGuy]

Normally, my feeling in a case like this would be that this guy has already paid enough, and there’s no reason to pursue legal action.

The fact that he has publicly said that he no longer blames himself, and instead, blames the cruise line, changes things for me.

He doesn’t think he did anything wrong, just like he didn’t think he did anything wrong with a ridiculous amount of traffic infractions.

It’s a pattern, and he needs to get the message.

 

[SouthAussie]

I'd love to know if there really was only one window open.

And if so, was that one window somewhat separated from the seating in the area, perhaps so the cross ventilation (breeze) through other open windows would not disturb passengers who were seated at chairs in that area?

And why SA chose the one and only open window to peer out of. (Not suggesting anything nefarious, just suggesting that he knew it was open and it would offer the clearest view and/or the coolness of the cross ventilation.)

" .... this is a wall of windows with one random window that was open."
https://nypost.com/2019/11/22/video...grandfather-thought-window-was-closed-lawyer/

 

[MassGuy]

I'd love to know if there really was only one window open.

And if so, was that one window somewhat separated from the seating in the area, perhaps so the cross ventilation (breeze) through other open windows would not disturb passengers who were seated at chairs in that area?

And why SA chose the one and only open window to peer out of. (Not suggesting anything nefarious, just suggesting that he knew it was open and it would offer the clearest view and/or the coolness of the cross ventilation.)

" .... this is a wall of windows with one random window that was open."
https://nypost.com/2019/11/22/video...grandfather-thought-window-was-closed-lawyer/

Yeah, what the the fricken odds?

If there was in fact one open window, it’s incredibly unlikely that he would have somehow chosen that particular one, to do something that inherently dangerous.

Personally, I don’t think he chose that window and got unlucky that it was open. I think he chose that window precisely because it was open.

So I agree.

 

[SouthAussie]

Yeah, what the the fricken odds?

If there was in fact one open window, it’s incredibly unlikely that he would have somehow chosen that particular one, to do something that inherently dangerous.

Personally, I don’t think he chose that window and got unlucky that it was open. I think he chose that window precisely because it was open.

So I agree.

Yes, I have been thinking that maybe he was standing at that window for a bit of cooler air. He didn't want to hold Chloe too close because she was wet and it was making him wet, he also didn't want to keep following her around, so he picked her up and stood - then sat - her on the safety rail.

Chloe might have wanted to tap on the window, and he leaned forward and tapped the air and said 'no, there's no glass here'. And she leaned forward to copy him, and was gone.

 

[al66pine]

A $5000,000 Goodwill Gesture "if MW Loses the Case?"

Maybe the Wiegands should get a small settlement (half-million or so) as a good will gesture from RCCL since the tragedy happened on their ship, even if MW loses the case. Seems like the right thing to do for all their suffering that will never end, even though SA is really to blame.

@jeena A half-million dollar settlement? As a goodwill gesture?
If MW (Winkleman) loses the case? His law firm's arrangements (documented by a letter of engagement, signed by MW and by Mom & Dad), set forth the terms of the law firm's compensation. Typically personal injury work is done on a contingency basis.
1) If there is a pre-trial settlement, law firm receives X% (often 30% - 40%) of settlement amt, and clients Mom & Dad receive the settlement amt, less the <-- law firm % and less expenses incurred for expert witness reports, and many other expenses.
2) If matter goes to trial, basically same as above, but law firm receives a larger %, often 40 to 50%.

What amt would Mom & Dad receive if pre-trial settlement was $1,000,000? Or trial verdict of $1,000,000? And how much would law firm receive in each of ^ outcomes?

Now let's flip the coin, to see about effects on cruiseline.
Before any threat of litigation, no questions asked, IIUC, cruiseline paid some travel expenses etc. for Mom & Dad. In grand scheme of things, a relatively paltry amount - $10,000.or 25,000. I do not recall a $ figure, but. imo, that seems like a "goodwill gesture."
And regardless of eventual outcome, cruiseline pays defense counsel to represent co. Typically defense counsel/law firm is paid per hour. Easily can tally up to $ *advertiser censored*,000, win, lose, or draw.

Is it possible for either 'side' to know without a doubt, what the final outcome will be? IDTS, not in this case.

Now let's put you in shoes of the cruiseline.
Let's say, you own a house on two acres or a hundred acres of land ('free and clear' all paid for). Driving along one day, G'pa pulls off the road there, walks on your property, and w Chloe, he plays 'scare the child game' and she falls and dies.
Are you saying you think it would be appropriate for a court to order you to pay Chloe's Mom & Dad half a million $, because "the tragedy happened" on your land? And to force you to sell your house & land to pay the civil judgment? That is, even if G'pa caused the death? Not a perfect analogy to this case.

Would you think to yourself, I'll offer a $ 500,000 payment to Chloe's parents , as a goodwill gesture, because ---
1) it's the "right thing to do" because Chloe's death happened on my land, even tho G'pa is really at fault? From your post, it seems as if you would.
I hope G'pa will play the 'scare the child' game on your property, not mine. jmo. Personally, I'm gonna try to keep G'pa (and Chloe) off my land. jmo.

 

[SouthAussie]

A $5000,000 Goodwill Gesture "if MW Loses the Case?"

@jeena A half-million dollar settlement? As a goodwill gesture?
If MW (Winkleman) loses the case? His law firm's arrangements (documented by a letter of engagement, signed by MW and by Mom & Dad), set forth the terms of the law firm's compensation. Typically personal injury work is done on a contingency basis.
1) If there is a pre-trial settlement, law firm receives X% (often 30% - 40%) of settlement amt, and clients Mom & Dad receive the settlement amt, less the <-- law firm % and less expenses incurred for expert witness reports, and many other expenses.
2) If matter goes to trial, basically same as above, but law firm receives a larger %, often 40 to 50%.

What amt would Mom & Dad receive if pre-trial settlement was $1,000,000? Or trial verdict of $1,000,000? And how much would law firm receive in each of ^ outcomes?

Now let's flip the coin, to see about effects on cruiseline.
Before any threat of litigation, no questions asked, IIUC, cruiseline paid some travel expenses etc. for Mom & Dad. In grand scheme of things, a relatively paltry amount - $10,000.or 25,000. I do not recall a $ figure, but. imo, that seems like a "goodwill gesture."
And regardless of eventual outcome, cruiseline pays defense counsel to represent co. Typically defense counsel/law firm is paid per hour. Easily can tally up to $ *advertiser censored*,000, win, lose, or draw.

Is it possible for either 'side' to know without a doubt, what the final outcome will be? IDTS, not in this case.

Now let's put you in shoes of the cruiseline.
Let's say, you own a house on two acres or a hundred acres of land ('free and clear' all paid for). Driving along one day, G'pa pulls off the road there, walks on your property, and w Chloe, he plays 'scare the child game' and she falls and dies.
Are you saying you think it would be appropriate for a court to order you to pay Chloe's Mom & Dad half a million $, because "the tragedy happened" on your land? And to force you to sell your house & land to pay the civil judgment? That is, even if G'pa caused the death? Not a perfect analogy to this case.

Would you think to yourself, I'll offer a $ 500,000 payment to Chloe's parents , as a goodwill gesture, because ---
1) it's the "right thing to do" because Chloe's death happened on my land, even tho G'pa is really at fault? From your post, it seems as if you would.
I hope G'pa will play the 'scare the child' game on your property, not mine. jmo. Personally, I'm gonna try to keep G'pa (and Chloe) off my land. jmo.

Yes, I agree. The ramifications of lawsuits is that - ultimately - we all pay for them.

If insurance pay out for a successful lawsuit, or if Royal Caribbean are self insured, the cost of the increase in insurance premiums (or loss of money to Royal Caribbean) is passed on.
Passed on to the future cruise guests in higher cruise costs, passed on to the good Royal Caribbean staff who may not get any pay increases that they may be hoping for.

 

[katydid23]

Maybe the Wiegands should get a small settlement (half-million or so) as a good will gesture from RCCL since the tragedy happened on their ship, even if MW loses the case. Seems like the right thing to do for all their suffering that will never end, even though SA is really to blame.

That would be a horrible decision on RCCL's part. HORRIBLE in many ways.

Are they going to keep ALL windows locked down tight on all ships from now on? No more fresh air, nice ocean breezes for anyone anymore?

ONE stupid, irresponsibly reckless grandfather knocks his grandchild out of an open window, due to his own criminal negligence, and now the rest of the world loses out on fresh air in the upper decks?