IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #7

[justbreathe]

What lawsuits do you think negligent grandfather can start? He’s not legally eligible to file wrongful death suit so I’m interested in your opinion and what I’m missing.

No - I meant Winkleman. He gonna make some cruise lines pay for this coronavirus mess in Asia. $$$ And so many Brits know who he is from all his DM coverage.

 

[loveandhugs]

It’s bothered me from the beginning how little Chloe was left alone with the “elderly” SA right after boarding a cruise ship. Then again everything about this case .... how it happened, why it happened, and the family’s behavior since... raises red flags for me.

I have the same feelings!

 

[justbreathe]

I think the reason the civil trial would wait until the criminal trial is completed would be because SA could not be compelled to provide testimony in the civil trial (which I assume RCCL or MW would seek) because he would be exposed to self-incrimination that could affect his criminal trial. That being the case they would hold off on the civil trial until post-criminal trial. At least that's my non-lawyer understanding of the reasoning.

If the civil trial is dismissed it has no affect on SA's criminal trial as no testimony would be required. So I don't see any reason to delay the dismissal. SA is not a party to the civil case so the judge in the civil case has no obligation to him.

I have a feeling the judge in the civil suit will decide to go forward and just wait it out, hoping in the interim one of the litigants will become encouraged to make the lawsuit go away. Decisions judges make can be appealed. Decisions people (or corporations) make on their own can not. Jmo

 

[justbreathe]

I’ve been going through the links in the media thread (a million thanks @oviedo ).

From this link https://nypost.com/2019/11/22/video...grandfather-thought-window-was-closed-lawyer/
A snipped quote of Winkleman: “He thought this window was closed … this is a wall of windows with one random window that was open. The whole thing happens in less than 30 seconds. And the amount of time he has her on the railing is about five seconds. So all this happens like that.”

So what I am wondering is if external camera footage is available would it show Chloe falling almost immediately (“about five seconds”) and, thus, demonstrating SA waited a significantly longer period of before falling to floor, etc? Just my own thoughts based on direct quote of Winkleman and, as many have pointed out, SA would not have been able to see the fall from the window at floor level.

'I saw her fall': Grandfather describes harrowing moment he dropped granddaughter to her death
SA clearly states he saw the entire fall.

He could see the fall from floor level.

 

[Wicked Strong]

Good point. That would explain why KW is so emphatic in insisting SA did nothing wrong, never ever ever placed a kid in danger, it's evil RCCL's fault, etc. Because KW knew that SA was irresponsible and yet she got lazy or whatever, and shuffled Chloe off to him rather than impose on one of the 4 other adults who could have watched her. I bet her intuition told her it was risky to let SA watch Chloe. She may have know he was drinking or medicated or just plain stupid, she ignored her own better judgement and now can't bear to face her own responsibility for Chloe's death.

Why didn't KW simply take Chloe with her? As a parent, unless I was going to be gone for hours, or the meeting(?) was so important that having my child with me would be inappropriate, I always took care of my child if we were on vacation or when I wasn't working. There was no reason that she couldn't spend time with Chloe. I wonder if she was simply not invested in being a mother at all times. I had many friends that loved being a mother, until it came time to take care of their children by themselves.

Also, maybe because I'm old, but my husband always took care of the details of our vacations. If something was important that someone in the family needed to see to, I'm surprised they would ask her instead of him.

MOO

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Why didn't KW simply take Chloe with her? As a parent, unless I was going to be gone for hours, or the meeting(?) was so important that having my child with me would be inappropriate, I always took care of my child if we were on vacation or when I wasn't working. There was no reason that she couldn't spend time with Chloe. I wonder if she was simply not invested in being a mother at all times. I had many friends that loved being a mother, until it came time to take care of their children by themselves.

Also, maybe because I'm old, but my husband always took care of the details of our vacations. If something was important that someone in the family needed to see to, I'm surprised they would ask her instead of him.

MOO

Just form what I've seen and heard in the media reports on this case, KW seems to be the one in charge. JMOO

 

[HRH Phoebe Cat]

This landlubber thanks you, @justbreathe !

*snipped by me*
I would really love to see the higher definition cctv footage. I'm sure it would answer a lot of people's questions about SA's movements and how he held CW.

Yes x 1,000 to this, @mheido67 !

So many unanswered questions, and I simply do not trust anything put out by the W’s, SA and MW.

 

[Pigey]

Regarding KW leaving Chloe with elderly SA , I don't understand leaving her in his care. When my babies were so young I was always so aware of where they were and what they were doing. Maybe KW thought Chloe was having a good time so she left her. I don't understand leaving a baby in a strange environment. Maybe Chloe would have been upset to leave the water fun. My aunt always said "better you cry than I cry for you".

 

[Hughaskton]

I wonder if anyone who saw SA on the floor hadn't seen Chloe and thought the "elderly gentleman" had suffered a heart attack/stroke or passed out from the heat/humidity? What is most peculiar is that SA was not calling out for help or pleading for someone to rescue his grandchild on the concrete dock below. I guess he figured it wasn't necessary to cry out for help because he knew that Chloe wouldn't survive the 150 foot fall.

That has bothered me at bit. Most people’s first instinct to yell, help. While the reality is she could not survive that fall, that reality often doesn’t hit until later. The dis belief is just human nature.

 

[JulieBEMT]

Why didn't KW simply take Chloe with her? As a parent, unless I was going to be gone for hours, or the meeting(?) was so important that having my child with me would be inappropriate, I always took care of my child if we were on vacation or when I wasn't working. There was no reason that she couldn't spend time with Chloe. I wonder if she was simply not invested in being a mother at all times. I had many friends that loved being a mother, until it came time to take care of their children by themselves.

Also, maybe because I'm old, but my husband always took care of the details of our vacations. If something was important that someone in the family needed to see to, I'm surprised they would ask her instead of him.

MOO

This might be the one and only time I understand something KW did. My guess would be that CW was playing contently in the splash pad. KW may have thought she would be back soon enough that it wasn't worth drying off an upset (for being taken out of the splashing fun) and likely crying CW when she was going to be right back. (Remember, SA only had her for a total of 15 minutes when she died.) Had CW stayed in the splash pad area, I'm sure there were many other parents and children in addition to SA. (Of course we still have no idea where dad, brother and other grandparents were.) If SA had just kept her in that area, she'd be alive today.

 

[JulieBEMT]

dbm

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

This might be the one and only time I understand something KW did. My guess would be that CW was playing contently in the splash pad. KW may have thought she would be back soon enough that it wasn't worth drying off an upset (for being taken out of the splashing fun) and likely crying CW when she was going to be right back. (Remember, SA only had her for a total of 15 minutes when she died.) Had CW stayed in the splash pad area, I'm sure there were many other parents and children in addition to SA. (Of course we still have no idea where dad, brother and other grandparents were.) If SA had just kept her in that area, she'd be alive today.

BBM Yes, but...that wasn't part of the plan. IMHO.

 

[Kindred]

I have a feeling the judge in the civil suit will decide to go forward and just wait it out, hoping in the interim one of the litigants will become encouraged to make the lawsuit go away. Decisions judges make can be appealed. Decisions people (or corporations) make on their own can not. Jmo

I don't know. If Winkleman had any merit with his complaint or at least the slightest chance of there being any, I could see the judge letting it proceed. But he really doesn't. He whines like a child at anything that the defendant files, he claims RC is being misleading while trying to claim "industry standards" for apartment buildings as if they apply to a seagoing vessel. To me, his arguments are like throwing spaghetti at the wall and hoping something sticks. And the fact that the denial of the motion to dismiss only really focused on the inclusion of the photos/video and not anything else in their argument seems to me like the judge may agree. Most of his orders to RCCL have been basically 'clean this up'.

I keep seeing people claim that judges don't dismiss cases often but actually they do. You can sue for anything but judges will happily throw out your garbage case if it doesn't pass their smell test. They do not like having their time wasted for frivolous bull when they have a pile of legitimate cases worth their attention. And they don't care if you appeal it or not because that's not their problem, it goes on to someone else's court and it's the plaintiff's money being wasted to keep filing so it's water off the judges back. Take your monkeys to another circus, we have plenty here.

 

[In vino veritas]

I don't know. If Winkleman had any merit with his complaint or at least the slightest chance of there being any, I could see the judge letting it proceed. But he really doesn't. He whines like a child at anything that the defendant files, he claims RC is being misleading while trying to claim "industry standards" for apartment buildings as if they apply to a seagoing vessel. To me, his arguments are like throwing spaghetti at the wall and hoping something sticks. And the fact that the denial of the motion to dismiss only really focused on the inclusion of the photos/video and not anything else in their argument seems to me like the judge may agree. Most of his orders to RCCL have been basically 'clean this up'.

I keep seeing people claim that judges don't dismiss cases often but actually they do. You can sue for anything but judges will happily throw out your garbage case if it doesn't pass their smell test. They do not like having their time wasted for frivolous bull when they have a pile of legitimate cases worth their attention. And they don't care if you appeal it or not because that's not their problem, it goes on to someone else's court and it's the plaintiff's money being wasted to keep filing so it's water off the judges back. Take your monkeys to another circus, we have plenty here.

I truly agree with everything you’ve just stated. I’m hoping in the next few days we see a dismissal of this travesty of a lawsuit.

 

[oviedo]

I’ve been going through the links in the media thread (a million thanks @oviedo ).

From this link https://nypost.com/2019/11/22/video...grandfather-thought-window-was-closed-lawyer/
A snipped quote of Winkleman: “He thought this window was closed … this is a wall of windows with one random window that was open. The whole thing happens in less than 30 seconds. And the amount of time he has her on the railing is about five seconds. So all this happens like that.”

So what I am wondering is if external camera footage is available would it show Chloe falling almost immediately (“about five seconds”) and, thus, demonstrating SA waited a significantly longer period of before falling to floor, etc? Just my own thoughts based on direct quote of Winkleman and, as many have pointed out, SA would not have been able to see the fall from the window at floor level.

'I saw her fall': Grandfather describes harrowing moment he dropped granddaughter to her death
SA clearly states he saw the entire fall.

I think when we see the video on RCCLs proprietary software it’s going to be very clear IMO - I was going through some of the old images of when George Smith died in his honeymoon on RCCL and the video way back then was good - I also plan to check the pier next month and see if I can spot external cameras facing the ship when we dock

 

[Montrealaise]

This might be the one and only time I understand something KW did. My guess would be that CW was playing contently in the splash pad. KW may have thought she would be back soon enough that it wasn't worth drying off an upset (for being taken out of the splashing fun) and likely crying CW when she was going to be right back. (Remember, SA only had her for a total of 15 minutes when she died.) Had CW stayed in the splash pad area, I'm sure there were many other parents and children in addition to SA. (Of course we still have no idea where dad, brother and other grandparents were.) If SA had just kept her in that area, she'd be alive today.

That's what I posted earlier - KW just left them in the water splash area thinking they'd stay there. She didn't know that Chloe would wander off (although, as a mother of a toddler, she should have known that's what toddlers do) and that SA would just let her go wherever she wanted to go.

 

[jwilliams44118]

I see recent posts wondering if the judge will dismiss the civil case at this point. But I saw an article already from last week saying that the judge already ruled the case can go forward.

South Bend family's suit against Royal Caribbean over toddler's death can continue, judge says

Snipped from article: "In seeking the dismissal of the lawsuit, Royal Caribbean offered as evidence video footage and still images that it claims show Anello knew the window was open. But at this stage in the case, Graham wrote, a court may not consider such evidence."

 

[jwilliams44118]

I see recent posts wondering if the judge will dismiss the civil case at this point. But I saw an article already from last week saying that the judge already ruled the case can go forward.

South Bend family's suit against Royal Caribbean over toddler's death can continue, judge says

Snipped from article: "In seeking the dismissal of the lawsuit, Royal Caribbean offered as evidence video footage and still images that it claims show Anello knew the window was open. But at this stage in the case, Graham wrote, a court may not consider such evidence."

MOO. As a second thought... Although motions to dismiss are common practice, RCCL lawyers would have known that the video could not have been considered at this stage. Smart play on the part of RCCL to finally get some video to the public for public relation purposes.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Question for those who sail RCCL regularly: Does Royal Caribbean use an electronic key system that tracks passenger's every move? DH and I sail on Princess that now uses an onboard Medallion that opens your cabin door automatically as you approach, tracks onboard purchases and activities, lets your steward know when you're not in your stateroom, etc. Newer Princess vessels are being built for Medallion use while older ships are being retrofitted. The electronic system was optional on our cruise in 2018 but is now mandatory for all passengers. The program is not without a few operational glitches, and it is highly intrusive: Big Brother is watching! I'm wondering if Freedom of the Seas was using this type of technology in July, 2019 and that LE will know the precise movements of everyone in the Weigand's family travel group.

Princess Cruises: Princess MedallionClass™ - Get More From Your Vacation

 

[Kindred]

I see recent posts wondering if the judge will dismiss the civil case at this point. But I saw an article already from last week saying that the judge already ruled the case can go forward.

South Bend family's suit against Royal Caribbean over toddler's death can continue, judge says

Snipped from article: "In seeking the dismissal of the lawsuit, Royal Caribbean offered as evidence video footage and still images that it claims show Anello knew the window was open. But at this stage in the case, Graham wrote, a court may not consider such evidence."

That's Winkleman being misleading again. The judge threw out the first motion to dismiss but said that RCCL could refile, which they did.

New Motion to Dismiss 2-13.pdf