IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #5

Status
Not open for further replies.
It certainly appears that he knew the window was open, because it seems that he waits for the previous gentleman to move away from it.

SA then goes directly to it, passing by several other available windows. This part is never mentioned in the narratives of the video given. What other reason could he have for wanting that particular window?

JMO, though, the video does nothing to prove that he knew the window was open, or that he himself was able to breach the window opening, or that he held Chloe past that opening.

She was propelled forward by the rocking motion, which he explains as trying to enable her to reach the glass.

ETA: This is why the family is adamant that SA did not drop her. Instead, it is "she fell".
He placed her on the window sill. If that window was closed, would she have been able to sit on that window ledge, and not be up against the glass, with her toes and legs?

I don't think he would have been able to place her that way in a closed window, without know ing it was closed. The glass would have been clearly visible and touchable.

I HOPE the jury is taken on a field trip to the 11th deck and is allowed to walk up to the windows themselves.
 
IMO, we would not be able to see her at all if she was sitting on the ledge or inside the window track. The railing being at the height it is is the only thing that allows us to see her.
Where he shifts her from standing to sitting is the only place that I can see where she was suspended in the air and would be considered to be "dangling".


Ok, so for a moment she is being dangled. I would use that as evidence of his blatant criminal neglect, right there. There is no justification whatsoever for that baby to be in such a vulnerable position, at the hands of her caregiver.
 
This, IMO, is why the issue of thinking there was glass there is so important. IMO, he is saying "I wasn't negligent, because I thought there was glass there". No negligence, no negligent homicide.

I feel so bad for that boy. The past two weeks or so with the holidays must have been so terribly hard for the family. They really need their privacy now so they can try to heal. I hope the media silence can hold out a little while longer. They all genuinely need time alone to grieve and it doesn't seem like they've had that time at all since it happened.

IMO him putting her on the railing in the first place, glass or not, is still negligent. Even if she hadn't gone out the window and only fell down between the railing and the window she still could have been badly injured. Her pretty sunbonnet wouldn't give any protection for all the metal and glass and she still could have suffered a bad head injury or a broken arm or something that could have pulled them off the ship to a regular hospital either way. Would she still be alive? Yes most likely. But he clearly didn't have as good a grip on her as he had seemed to think he did and glass being there is no excuse.

And I'm still convinced he moved her from the rail to the window ledge/frame when he shifts her from his right to the left. She's suddenly so far away from him, and the way he leans over the rail there is no way she can still be standing on it at the same time or she'd be under him


I agree that , glass or not, placing the baby up on that perch was still negligent. If she had fallen backwards, which she may have if she lurched forward and hit the glass, she would have fallen on her head onto the floor. We may have been having a similar conversation about the tragedy if he had chosen a window that was closed. JMO
 
That's what he says, but there isn't anything anywhere in the video that looks like him attempting to knock. From the rear you never see his right hand come up into view reaching or looking for glass. From the side you only see him swaying back and forth and then leaning very far forward and staying there for several moments before collapsing.
I agree.

I think that when he leaned very far forward, his girth shoved her off her perch. :(
 
Did Attorney Sing the Siren's Song of SCOOP to Reporter?
@Chikkamma :) bbm Yes, agreeing.
Emphasis on reporter DB's word. Not because I think he is being intentionally deceitful.
Imo he got bamboozled.


..SNIPPED...
.

I suppose this was mentioned, but here's DB's twitter after the release of the laComay vid:




David Begnaud
@DavidBegnaud

·
Dec 18, 2019

A careful review of said video confirms, however that Salvatore Anello is guilty of negligent homicide as charged. The evidence collected in this case corroborates his criminal responsibility. We hope and expect Chloe’s family fully cooperates...

3

5
 
3A2C6797-0DC1-4CB8-86A1-D2D2F6697C19.jpeg 3A2C6797-0DC1-4CB8-86A1-D2D2F6697C19.jpeg
With all due respect, the two cases are not
even remotely similar.

Lanes parents were behaving responsibly.

They were not dangling the boy over the open jaws of an alligator.
I seldom jump In without catching up but wow - someone compared these two cases ? I promise to go back and try to comprehend that if true - he dangled this baby outside the window and dropped her 11 stories - no comparison IMO
This was a similar view
 
View attachment 223175 View attachment 223175
I seldom jump In without catching up but wow - someone compared these two cases ? I promise to go back and try to comprehend that if true - he dangled this baby outside the window and dropped her 11 stories - no comparison IMO
This was a similar view
Exactly. In that case, the family was complying with signs that said “no swimming.” The kid was standing in a foot of water, and there was nothing warning anyone about alligators.

There was clear negligence on the part of Disney, but not in regards to the parents.

In this case, we have a guy who went out of his way to put his granddaughter in danger, and his actions alone are what killed her.

There is not only no comparison, but it’s laughable to attempt to make one.
 
Serious answer: I highly doubt it, as those windows would have been designed to the cruise line’s specifications.

Facetious answer: I sure hope so, as the more ridiculous a lawsuit, the more entertaining it is.

Because as well all know, everyone wants to go on a cruise where windows don’t open, and the fresh ocean breeze has to be imagined. It’s too risky to allow people to use basic common sense, and expect them not to balance their children on a ledge where they can easily fall to their deaths.

Or something...

It’s all good though, because after a few days of blaming himself, grandpa has now absolved himself of all responsibility, and placed the blame squarely where it belongs—on the cruise line. :eek:

And that’s what bothers me the most. He believes he did nothing wrong.


BBM.
Exactly. The elephant is in the room & on video!
 
I suppose this was mentioned, but here's DB's twitter after the release of the laComay vid:




David Begnaud
@DavidBegnaud

·
Dec 18, 2019

A careful review of said video confirms, however that Salvatore Anello is guilty of negligent homicide as charged. The evidence collected in this case corroborates his criminal responsibility. We hope and expect Chloe’s family fully cooperates...

3

5

For accuracy's sake, I believe that the above quote was made by the Attorney General Dennise Longo Quinones, not DB. The CBS News article is linked to in his Twitter feed:

We are unaware of how Kobbo Santarrosa obtained the video of the unfortunate incident where Chloe Wiegand lost her life," Attorney General Dennise Longo Quiñones told CBS News. "A careful review of said video confirms, however that Salvatore Anello is guilty of negligent homicide as charged. The evidence collected in this case corroborates his criminal responsibility. We hope and expect Chloe's family fully cooperates with our proceedings and that justice prevails in this case with conviction."

Grandfather offered plea deal in girl's cruise ship death as Puerto Rico TV show airs video
 
I keep reading (here and other blogs) that mother of CW is an attorney/former judge but I don’t see any reference to her profession in the articles I have read..only her husband being a police officer. I probably missed it so if anyone could provide a link...I would like to read. Thanks in advance.
 
<modsnip -quoted post was removed>

Had this child managed to fall out that window without any assistance, I’m sure we’d see something similar from Royal Caribbean.

But for the most part, the public is on their side, and the villain is the unrepentant grandfather who caused her death.

It’s a business decision at this point, and a legal one. Who knows how they will proceed, or how this will shake out.

But the lawsuit by the family is saying “you are at fault, not someone in our family.”

I couldn’t disagree more.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What if it had been an adult? What if, let's say, two adults were fooling around, and one of them lifted the other up, and he fell out that same window...

Manslaughter charges would be a given, people would not be very sympathetic and I doubt very much anyone would be blaming the ship.

For some odd reason this child's death at the hands of a obscenely negligent caretaker is being seen as, "punishment enough", by her own family.

The harrowing gravity of reckless disregard, is truly impossible to understand for anyone who's seen the video.

Either he really thought there was glass there and we're all mistaken or her family members are...
a little unwell just now. (as most here know, my money is on temporary insanity. They need a Trauma Therapist more than Winkleman! ).

I found this interesting record of all logged mishaps at sea, (not sure if it's been shared previously):

Events at Sea
 
Child Deaths. Apples & Oranges?
... cars backing over children ....rear cameras.....
parents who have "forgotten" their child was in the car and died from the heat....Disney World had been in existence with no alligator attacks....Backovers | KidsandCars.org
@My Belle :) Just jumping off your ^ post, since it discussed multiple situations causing child deaths, all of which are unbelievably sad.

Not sure how citing instances of prosecutors exercising prosecutorial discretion, by electing not to bring charges for completely dissimilar circumstances helps to further discussion of case at hand. Sometimes the person-responsible-has-suffered-enough-concept factors into decision not to prosecute, but is rarely if ever the principle basis imo.

In hot-car-child-deaths, sometimes prosecutors have prosecuted, other times not, all depending on the circumstances of the case. Ditto backover cases. But in backovers, AFAIK, no prosecutor has exercised discretion not to prosecute where an adult held a toddler on driveway/on ground behind a car, then seconds later the car backed over the child causing death.

Comparing Chloe's death w hot-car-child-death. or w backover cases seems like apples & oranges. Or cucumbers & kumquats, jmo. I'm going to try to refrain from commenting further on situations where the only commonality w this case is death of a child.
 
I keep reading (here and other blogs) that mother of CW is an attorney/former judge but I don’t see any reference to her profession in the articles I have read..only her husband being a police officer. I probably missed it so if anyone could provide a link...I would like to read. Thanks in advance.

The girl's mother is Kimberly Wiegand, who used to be a deputy prosecutor for St. Joseph County. Her father is Officer Alan Wiegand with the South Bend Police Department.
Family's worst nightmare: Toddler of South Bend officer falls to her death on cruise ship
 
You tied up the loose ends of my thought process and supplied the missing link (public is on RCCL side, but not Disney's) I failed to do, thankfully you did, Kudos!
Because it's just a window. Windows don't crawl out of the wall and eat people.

Reasonable people know what could happen if you shove a toddler out a window they dont require warning signage.
 
Last edited:
Gotcha. Yeah, it was double layered for Disney. It was clearly a business decision, as they knew the optics. The last thing they needed was more negative publicity from this, as the outcry from the public was tremendous.

I’m sure they felt bad as well, as they had plenty of opportunities to prevent something like that, and were clearly aware of the danger. I recall seeing an interview with Disney Chairman Bob Iger, who was clearly torn up about it.

Had this child managed to fall out that window without any assistance, I’m sure we’d see something similar from Royal Caribbean.

But for the most part, the public is on their side, and the villain is the unrepentant grandfather who caused her death.

It’s a business decision at this point, and a legal one. Who knows how they will proceed, or how this will shake out.

But the lawsuit by the family is saying “you are at fault, not someone in our family.”

I couldn’t disagree more.
I have been reading comments here and elsewhere, and very very few people < modsnip - calling out a member> are on the family's side. Those who are vilifying RRCL are usually people who aren't familiar with the case and just know what Winkleman has said, i.e. the toddler fell out on an open window in a child's play area - and they usually change their mind once they learn the facts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Child Deaths. Apples & Oranges?
@My Belle :) Just jumping off your ^ post, since it discussed multiple situations causing child deaths, all of which are unbelievably sad.

Not sure how citing instances of prosecutors exercising prosecutorial discretion, by electing not to bring charges for completely dissimilar circumstances helps to further discussion of case at hand. Sometimes the person-responsible-has-suffered-enough-concept factors into decision not to prosecute, but is rarely if ever the principle basis imo.

In hot-car-child-deaths, sometimes prosecutors have prosecuted, other times not, all depending on the circumstances of the case. Ditto backover cases. But in backovers, AFAIK, no prosecutor has exercised discretion not to prosecute where an adult held a toddler on driveway/on ground behind a car, then seconds later the car backed over the child causing death.

Comparing Chloe's death w hot-car-child-death. or w backover cases seems like apples & oranges. Or cucumbers & kumquats, jmo. I'm going to try to refrain from commenting further on situations where the only commonality w this case is death of a child.
I think the best analogy to this case is that of the Texas mother who decided to play a game of "chicken" with her children, driving her SUV towards them. Her three-year-old didn't get out of the way fast enough and he was crushed underneath the wheels of her car. She has been charged with criminally negligent homicide. Now, I'm sure there was no intention to kill her son, but as far as I know, nobody is saying that she shouldn't be charged because "she's suffered enough" or threatening to sue the car manufacturer.
 
Newer La Comay episode that shows extended footage of what happened (from the side view) after SA’s collapse to the floor:


Kobbo Santarrosa (the puppet) points out a couple of things he didn’t mention in the first episode. Will list them in a separate post.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
163
Guests online
913
Total visitors
1,076

Forum statistics

Threads
589,931
Messages
17,927,846
Members
228,004
Latest member
CarpSleuth
Back
Top