GUILTY IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #9 *NO JAIL*

[Blondie in Spokane]

Sorry the above post is so messed up.....I’m on my phone & it’s next to impossible to use. Trying to post the daily mail link but it won’t do it for some reason.

 

[MsMarple]

Sorry the above post is so messed up.....I’m on my phone & it’s next to impossible to use. Trying to post the daily mail link but it won’t do it for some reason.

Mother of Chloe Wiegand describes breaking down during video deposition | Daily Mail Online

I don't trust the family. IMO this is part of their latest claim that it was a cruise ship employee who opened the window and therefore was responsible for Chloe's death.

IMO the family and their lawyer are trying to "soften" the story by making Chloe's mother more sympathetic. After all, what has everyone been saying about the family's apparent speedy forgiveness of SA?

Nope, not buying it. MOO.

 

[In vino veritas]

Mother of Chloe Wiegand describes breaking down during video deposition | Daily Mail Online

I don't trust the family. IMO this is part of their latest claim that it was a cruise ship employee who opened the window and therefore was responsible for Chloe's death.

IMO the family and their lawyer are trying to "soften" the story by making Chloe's mother more sympathetic. After all, what has everyone been saying about the family's apparent speedy forgiveness of SA?

Nope, not buying it. MOO.

Frankly, I think it makes the family look foolish. If, as KW alleges, she and her husband Alan have yet to see the CTTV footage of the accident, how can the lawsuit have any credibility. Additionally, from their investigators reenactment, their lawsuit is further harmed, as the investigators claim they couldn’t possibly access the open window without some gymnastics.... ergo, neither could SA. If that’s the case, how can they possibly allege the windows are unsafe for children and don’t meet safety standards?? So absurd.

 

[In vino veritas]

The Daily Mail article concludes by stating RCCL has filed a new motion asking the Miami judge to rule in their favor, as the Wiegands brought the lawsuit straight out of the gate, without any knowledge of the facts of the accident and maintain to this date they still have not viewed the video, nor obtained details from SA.

Perhaps, after all, this case will not go to trial at the end of April.

 

[Marysmith]

The Daily Mail article concludes by stating RCCL has filed a new motion asking the Miami judge to rule in their favor, as the Wiegands brought the lawsuit straight out of the gate, without any knowledge of the facts of the accident and maintain to this date they still have not viewed the video, nor obtained details from SA.

Perhaps, after all, this case will not go to trial at the end of April.

Let’s hope. I do hope there is not a settlement.

 

[Seattle1]

The Daily Mail article concludes by stating RCCL has filed a new motion asking the Miami judge to rule in their favor, as the Wiegands brought the lawsuit straight out of the gate, without any knowledge of the facts of the accident and maintain to this date they still have not viewed the video, nor obtained details from SA.

Perhaps, after all, this case will not go to trial at the end of April.

RCCL alleged the same when they filed to have charges dismissed. I think this will go to trial, unfortunately.

 

[ilovewings]

Mother of Chloe Wiegand describes breaking down during video deposition | Daily Mail Online

Mother of Chloe accuses grandpa of killing child- he says " I know"

 

[ilovewings]

Mother of Chloe Wiegand describes breaking down during video deposition | Daily Mail Online

Mother of Chloe accuses grandpa of killing child- he says " I know"

This info comes from a video deposition

 

[MsMarple]

Mother of Chloe Wiegand describes breaking down during video deposition | Daily Mail Online

Mother of Chloe accuses grandpa of killing child- he says " I know"

The couple say they decided never to watch the harrowing on-board CCTV footage that showed Anello lifting Chloe up and placing her on a wooden guardrail before she plummeted 150ft.

'I don't think I can watch that, I'm sorry,' Kimberly reiterates, breaking away to compose herself as Louis mentions the video.
...
'By their own admission, Plaintiffs (Chloe's parents) have never seen the video footage of the incident or even discussed the details of the incident with Mr. Anello, the only known eyewitness,' they write.

'While RCL deeply sympathizes with Plaintiffs and understands why grieving parents may wish to avoid reliving such events, it remains that Plaintiffs brought a lawsuit against RCL over these very events.

'In fact, Plaintiffs decided to bring the lawsuit on the same day of Chloe's death, without knowing the full facts and circumstances that caused it.

'Indeed, Plaintiffs were not aware that, for eight seconds, Mr. Anello leaned over the railing that was inches in front of the window or that after he picked up Chloe and placed her on the railing, he then placed her on the windowsill that faced the pier below.

'Similarly, Plaintiffs were not aware that Mr. Anello held Chloe by the open window, which was flanked by tinted and reflective glass and open to the outside light, air and noise, for thirty four seconds.'
Mother of Chloe Wiegand describes breaking down during video deposition | Daily Mail Online

 

[Midwestmom2019]

There have been quite a lot of comments regarding SA’s sobriety, his prior rehab and a significant insurance policy on Chloe. I haven’t been able to find anything definitive to support those comments, so for the moment they remain hearsay.

HOWEVER, the fact the RCCL has not settled this case out of court by now, nor seems inclined to do so, leads me to believe they have very substantive proof that SA is solely to blame for Chloe’s death.

If this case goes to trial in April, I feel the only way this family will gain financially is if the jury rules by emotion and not intellect and facts.

Judging by the overwhelming number of social media comments stating SA is to blame, I have to think the Wiegands case is a no win.

Many cases settle at mediation or even literally on the courthouse steps. Pick a jury and it looks one way or the other and settles. But hopefully the truth will prevail. I’m almost convinced he deliberately dropped her. But deliberate or not, she was put in harm’s way by SA. Nothing else. His actions are the only reason she fell to her death.

 

[ilovewings]

Many cases settle at mediation or even literally on the courthouse steps. Pick a jury and it looks one way or the other and settles. But hopefully the truth will prevail. I’m almost convinced he deliberately dropped her. But deliberate or not, she was put in harm’s way by SA. Nothing else. His actions are the only reason she fell to her death.

I don't believe he did it on purpose: he would have to be a flaming sociopath to have done that, but his reckless actions clearly resulted in her death.

 

[TDoc72]

I don't believe he did it on purpose: he would have to be a flaming sociopath to have done that, but his reckless actions clearly resulted in her death.

Me either. I was actually sympathetic to him at first. I thought it was a horrible yet negligent accident. I didn’t think he should do jail time either; probation and having to live with it for the rest of his life was enough for me. He (and the rest of the family) lost me when they decided to sue the cruise line. It really caused me to think less of all of them (except Chloe and the brother).

 

[ilovewings]

Me either. I was actually sympathetic to him at first. I thought it was a horrible yet negligent accident. I didn’t think he should do jail time either; probation and having to live with it for the rest of his life was enough for me. He (and the rest of the family) lost me when they decided to sue the cruise line. It really caused me to think less of all of them (except Chloe and the brother).

The parents disgust me (and many others)-- As soon as it happened they said they were going to sue the cruise line. They know it was his fault: he knows it was his fault-- yet all three of them refuse to take responsibility and instead want to get rich from suing the cruise line.

 

[LietKynes]

This family does not deserve a penny.
How in hell can they even begin to think it was the ship's fault ?
Hope RCCL stand firm and do not settle, or we could see more babies' being thrown out of windows or over the decks.
Anything for that pay day.
Imo.

 

[MsMarple]

This family does not deserve a penny.
How in hell can they even begin to think it was the ship's fault ?
Hope RCCL stand firm and do not settle, or we could see more babies' being thrown out of windows or over the decks.
Anything for that pay day.
Imo.

Pressed on why she decided to sue Royal Caribbean, Kimberly says: 'Well I think it's fair to say I didn't think that that window should be open in that particular location.'
...
'Mr Anello can distinguish between different shades of colors when he approaches a traffic signal. He does not have any restrictions on his drivers' license,' the firm's lawyers write.

'Mr Anello does not recall having problems seeing or distinguishing glass or tinted glass prior to the subject incident. He has never walked into a glass door.'
...
'This case has never been about money, it's about holding Royal Caribbean accountable,' Winkleman told DailyMail.com.
Mother of Chloe Wiegand describes breaking down during video deposition | Daily Mail Online
Asked if it would be dangerous to hold a toddler up in an open window 11 floors up, SA said 'absolutely.'

Asked if someone was going to hold a toddler up to glass that is 11 stories high, should they check to see whether there is glass there SA answered "One should be sure that there's glass there."

Is it just me or did KW and SA both indicate that sitting a kid in front of an open window was a stupid thing to do? And SA has never walked into a glass door, tinted or not, and didn't even have a restriction on his driver's license? Yet they both feel it was RCL's fault?

It's so frustrating that the family will likely walk away with something even though IMO they deserve nothing. Sadly, sometimes the law doesn't follow logic or common sense so anything can happen in this case. MOO.

 

[ilovewings]

Pressed on why she decided to sue Royal Caribbean, Kimberly says: 'Well I think it's fair to say I didn't think that that window should be open in that particular location.'
...
'Mr Anello can distinguish between different shades of colors when he approaches a traffic signal. He does not have any restrictions on his drivers' license,' the firm's lawyers write.

'Mr Anello does not recall having problems seeing or distinguishing glass or tinted glass prior to the subject incident. He has never walked into a glass door.'
...
'This case has never been about money, it's about holding Royal Caribbean accountable,' Winkleman told DailyMail.com.
Mother of Chloe Wiegand describes breaking down during video deposition | Daily Mail Online
Asked if it would be dangerous to hold a toddler up in an open window 11 floors up, SA said 'absolutely.'

Asked if someone was going to hold a toddler up to glass that is 11 stories high, should they check to see whether there is glass there SA answered "One should be sure that there's glass there."

Is it just me or did KW and SA both indicate that sitting a kid in front of an open window was a stupid thing to do? And SA has never walked into a glass door, tinted or not, and didn't even have a restriction on his driver's license? Yet they both feel it was RCL's fault?

It's so frustrating that the family will likely walk away with something even though IMO they deserve nothing. Sadly, sometimes the law doesn't follow logic or common sense so anything can happen in this case. MOO.

I agree with everything you said and I also agree the cruise line will most likely settle this case as a business decision. Think of the money they have lost during this past year.

 

[In vino veritas]

Pressed on why she decided to sue Royal Caribbean, Kimberly says: 'Well I think it's fair to say I didn't think that that window should be open in that particular location.'
...
'Mr Anello can distinguish between different shades of colors when he approaches a traffic signal. He does not have any restrictions on his drivers' license,' the firm's lawyers write.

'Mr Anello does not recall having problems seeing or distinguishing glass or tinted glass prior to the subject incident. He has never walked into a glass door.'
...
'This case has never been about money, it's about holding Royal Caribbean accountable,' Winkleman told DailyMail.com.
Mother of Chloe Wiegand describes breaking down during video deposition | Daily Mail Online
Asked if it would be dangerous to hold a toddler up in an open window 11 floors up, SA said 'absolutely.'

Asked if someone was going to hold a toddler up to glass that is 11 stories high, should they check to see whether there is glass there SA answered "One should be sure that there's glass there."

Is it just me or did KW and SA both indicate that sitting a kid in front of an open window was a stupid thing to do? And SA has never walked into a glass door, tinted or not, and didn't even have a restriction on his driver's license? Yet they both feel it was RCL's fault?

It's so frustrating that the family will likely walk away with something even though IMO they deserve nothing. Sadly, sometimes the law doesn't follow logic or common sense so anything can happen in this case. MOO.

IMO, the only way this family will gain financially is if a jury awards them compensation, ruling on emotions instead of facts. I sincerely doubt RCCL is going to settle with them, as they have not yet done so and are quite adamant in their various motions about the culpability of SA.

 

[Marysmith]

I agree with everything you said and I also agree the cruise line will most likely settle this case as a business decision. Think of the money they have lost during this past year.

True... I feel that public opinion is in their favour with this case though...

 

[In vino veritas]

True... I feel that public opinion is in their favour with this case though...

Actually, most comments on social media are firmly against the family, given the video evidence and SA’s continued lack of remorse. The only comments favoring the lawsuit against RCCL are from individuals who clearly haven’t read details of this case.
While there is much sympathy over the loss of beautiful little Chloe, I believe most find the behavior of the family reprehensible.

 

[Marysmith]

Actually, most comments on social media are firmly against the family, given the video evidence and SA’s continued lack of remorse. The only comments favoring the lawsuit against RCCL are from individuals who clearly haven’t read details of this case.
While there is much sympathy over the loss of beautiful little Chloe, I believe most find the behavior of the family reprehensible.

Sorry that’s what I meant - that public favour is actually with RCCL meaning that may sway them to take the case to trial and not settle.