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

Discussion in 'Crimes-Spotlight on Children' started by IceIce9, Oct 28, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. they'll get you

    they'll get you CHRIS. P. BACON

    Messages:
    11,594
    Likes Received:
    29,826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OMG imagine!

    If I was there I would've gone over to help and automatically looked out to see if she was on a ledge but unfortunately see the aftermath. So many people suffered that day and who'd need psychological help to the day they die.
    Who could continue on that cruise after experiencing that horrific event.
     
    8paws, fabvab, whatsnext and 6 others like this.


  2. oviedo

    oviedo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,179
    Likes Received:
    64,397
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My guess is there may have been those that saw him holding her over the rail...I think the video will show the whole story IMO
     
    abr, fabvab, MsFacetious and 9 others like this.
  3. mickey2942

    mickey2942 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,474
    Likes Received:
    37,934
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And even if he was diagnosed with any type of vision loss, that has absolutely no connection to placing a child on a guard railing.

    My husband and I were talking about something similar, what is a person's primary impediment to functioning? If someone can't read a medication bottle, that is a vision problem. If that same person cannot read a medication bottle and forgets to take their medications, vision loss is not their primary impediment to functioning.

    So, even if SA was totally blind, that doesn't justify placing a child on a railing. INMO, vision is not the problem here...and since the entire discussion is completely conjured, since SA has never mentioned a visual impairment, it is a moot point.
     
  4. mickey2942

    mickey2942 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,474
    Likes Received:
    37,934
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And even if he was diagnosed with any type of vision loss, that has absolutely no connection to placing a child on a guard railing.

    My husband and I were talking about something similar, what is a person's primary impediment to functioning? If someone can't read a medication bottle, that is a vision problem. If that same person cannot read a medication bottle and forgets to take their medications, vision loss is not their primary impediment to functioning.

    So, even if SA was totally blind, that doesn't justify placing a child on a railing. INMO, vision is not the problem here...and since the entire discussion is completely conjured, since SA has never mentioned a visual impairment, it is a moot point.
     
  5. proctorelites

    proctorelites Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    2,340
    Trophy Points:
    93
    My earlier post states how I feel abt all this. But this picture could present concern about grandpa's situational awareness. The pic makes it look like there will be boxwood shrubs right outside those windows, similar to home. I can see how one may not realise just how far up they are or easily be distratcted from their height, it isn't their normal routine & the point of the cruise is to relax. I can see how one just forgets their height and exactly where that window will lead. It's hard to accept one so relaxed as to forget the safety of their toddler.

    My 1st cruise, I had no idea just how large the ship was until we set sail and waived goodbye from the deck. I got sick & actually had to avoid the idea of being so far from the ground etc. Its hard to articulate. I can understand people vacillating on how this happened.
     
  6. neesaki

    neesaki Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,955
    Likes Received:
    17,477
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As is this whole situation. SMH
     
    fabvab, SaguaroSpirit and sassyblue like this.
  7. book-thinker

    book-thinker Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    3,180
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Medstudies thank you for your medical expertise.

    If I'm understanding correctly, the step-grandfather should've known the difference between a closed window and
    a open window. You refer to people with color blindness as someone with a color vision defects. People with color deficiencies can still distinguish by the scattered glare. Here's San Juan's weather:
    San Juan's weather was partly cloudy at around 5pm. The average hourly wind speed in San Juan on July 7 was 12.4 miles per hour.

    He'll have a difficult time convincing a jury his color blindness was a contributing factor in the death of Chloe.

    The residents in San Juan are very family-oriented and I believe the people of San Juan see this as negligent
    homicide. And a jury of his peers will convict to the full extent of the law. JMO
     
  8. IceIce9

    IceIce9 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,678
    Likes Received:
    13,286
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Chloe lived in Granger, and Grandpa lived in Valpo. I doubt if he was the daily babysitter due to the distance between the two cities.
     
  9. katydid23

    katydid23 Verified Juanette

    Messages:
    54,912
    Likes Received:
    86,261
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think it was negligence AND recklessness.

    I don't think he had any malicious intent. Other than his own arrogance , selfishness and obstinance.
     
  10. IceIce9

    IceIce9 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,678
    Likes Received:
    13,286
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree. Remember the first reports that came out (and were linked on the first thread that disappeared?)

    The video with the crew member imitating the way grandpa held Chloe outside the window, moving his arms up and down? An “act of games” in a different report.

    I don’t think he would have been charged unless there was clear evidence of negligence or recklessness.
     
  11. katydid23

    katydid23 Verified Juanette

    Messages:
    54,912
    Likes Received:
    86,261
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Freedom of the Seas Fatality?
    This picture shows me how easily she could have ended up out that window if he was holding on with only one arm, with her on the rail or window ledge...
    [​IMG]
     
  12. katydid23

    katydid23 Verified Juanette

    Messages:
    54,912
    Likes Received:
    86,261
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But grandpa looked out that window and down below, BEFORE picking her up and putting her on the guard rail. So he knew he was very high above the pavement below.

    Even if he wasn't on the 11th floor, but was on the 6th or 2nd or even 1st, she still could have died or been very severely injured if she fell through the open window.
     
  13. they'll get you

    they'll get you CHRIS. P. BACON

    Messages:
    11,594
    Likes Received:
    29,826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I doubt it would help if RC simply agreed to weld the windows shut.

    I'm thinking RC lawyers could be negotiating now for the best outcome for the family and the cruise line, which could be to settle and pay without blame to make the case go away, I guess we'll see.
    If GF climbed a ladder I'm sure RC would be blamed.

    I'm hearing a sigh of relief from all others ships that it didn't happen to them.



     
    SaguaroSpirit, katydid23 and neesaki like this.
  14. sl222

    sl222 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    3,273
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Thanks for sharing this pic again. In that CBS interview, he said he was holding her with one hand, and reaching out for the glass with the other one. ???? This makes no sense.

    Also referring to earlier discussion, he first looked out the window for 5 to 8 seconds before lifting Chloe up, then was at the window a total of 33 seconds, so he was aware of how high up they were but needless to say a toddler perched at a window on any floor is a danger. It's not a hockey rink with special glass. The more I think about it the more they are losing their case. Why so many explanations, why not just keep quiet until the trial; that is the only wise thing to do. Every time they bring it up a million more people learn the story who missed it the first time. When someone does something wrong, in time, you credit them with some dignity if they just keep their heads down and do the best they can going forward. (speaking in generalities)

    If I stood a toddler on a handrail in a public place, or sat her on one, I would already be aware that this in itself was a screwup and inappropriate. Both for the child, for the way it looks as the caregiver, and for the respect of the property I was leaning a child's weight on and risking a malfunction. You don't know it the rail is loose or whatever. You don't take chances like that with children. Like I said it looks like a ballet barre or a hand rail along a hospital wall or a stairway (and it's not even as large as a stair rail), I would never stand or sit a child on such a thing. Nor would anyone here, I am sure!
     
  15. Midwestmom2019

    Midwestmom2019 On Time Out

    Messages:
    1,343
    Likes Received:
    12,306
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That excited utterance exception to hearsay rules. Admissible in court bc generally believed that an unsolicited outcry at the time of the event is truthful. I guess bc the person blurting out did not have time to concoct I thought there was glass, I’m color blind. Does he have night vision issues? Oooops. Sorry. Not used as an excuse yet. Oh, that’s right. It was during the day. So maybe he should say the sun hit me right in my eyeballs and burned the retinas. I still can’t see today.
    Puhleez. What a whiny baby. He makes me sick. No b a l l s. None.

    Afraid of going to prison.
    You know, in some prisons, child molesters get molested, tortured, murdered. Jail house justice.
    Maybe he’s afraid for himself. Makes me even more sick.
     
  16. SpanishInquisition

    SpanishInquisition Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,604
    Likes Received:
    2,881
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think he may have had malicious intent in the moral sense rather than in the criminal sense. I think he knew the window was open and was trying to scare her but not actually harm her. By his account he had Chloe standing on the rail and then leaned forward, which must of totally freaked Chloe out so he switched to having her sit and doing the same thing. His actions of rocking back and forth don't make sense for banging on a window. He lied about Chloe asking to be picked up and Chloe reaching to bang the window, so the next shoe to drop if he'd admit to it was the 'game' he was playing was 'Scare Chloe' by pretending to push her out the window then pulling back.
     
  17. neesaki

    neesaki Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,955
    Likes Received:
    17,477
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I believe it was a “scare Chloe” game too. :mad:
     
  18. jeena

    jeena Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    180
    Likes Received:
    814
    Trophy Points:
    93
    It was reported that Chloe was wearing swim shoes, cheap brands have no support and slippery bottoms because the rubber doesn't grab well. Was Chloe unstable from her swim shoes while standing on the railing so SA seated her instead? I still can't wrap my head around SA doing something so dangerous as standing her on the railing, glass or no glass. Why did SA say he needed signage by RC to know it wasn't safe to stand a toddler on the railing? Sounds fishy.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019
    Fidobell, fabvab, MsFacetious and 8 others like this.
  19. justice4allnow

    justice4allnow Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    147
    Likes Received:
    1,557
    Trophy Points:
    93
    And it was so unsettling when Winkleman was asked by the CBS reporter why Sam was leaning forward with Chloe and Winkleman's reply was that it was obvious why they were leaning forward, it was to get a better view. Gone was any pretense from the lawyer that Chloe wanted to bang on the glass!
     
    8paws, fabvab, Montrealaise and 17 others like this.
  20. oviedo

    oviedo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,179
    Likes Received:
    64,397
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I see the point except this: I’ve seen the ships as I board - I see how tall they are- I just do not believe he didn’t realize in leaning over twice how high he was and the danger he could be putting the baby in - I agree with others it may be his arrogance
    JMO
     
    8paws, fabvab, MsFacetious and 7 others like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice