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

[sl222]

The Daily Mail (which I do like) is strange on this story. A few weeks ago when the video came out, it was like they were showing the evidence. This week they're back to focusing more on the sympathy factor. But at least they did include the video. But a lot of people just read the minimum and go with whatever the headline seems to suggest. It's still strange that they keep saying "elderly" though instead of simply listing his age which they know perfectly well.

 

[MsBetsy]

Jury Views? or Reenactments?.
. @Lawnguylander1964 sbm bbm Thanks for bringing posting these examples. From the post, without more info, appears judges allowed the OJ jury and Spector jury as a group, to view or inspect "the property which is the subject of litigation, or the place at which the offense is charged to have been committed, or the place or places at which any material fact occurred..."
IOW, jury viewed property, the land, the house, contents, like passing around a photo or letter while sitting in the jury box, but w property too big for courtroom. At those two sites, no witnesses performed; no "reenactors" did anything, IIRC. So those were "jury views."

Splitting hairs? No, yes, maybe. But reenactments are different from jury views.

Yes, I think the use of "jury view of the scene" is used sparingly, especially if there is evidence that can accomplish the same result in the courtroom.
The crime happened to occur in a place where there are multiple surveillance cameras.

The "man overboard" detection systems, which I'm assuming include both audio and video cameras, were put in place specifically for crime scene prevention.

There may be more video and audio evidence that we have not seen, as well.

Although it would be great for the jury to visit the ship, it will ultimately be up to the judge to decide and with all the other evidence he or she may believe it's not necessary.

Imo

 

[MsBetsy]

The Daily Mail (which I do like) is strange on this story. A few weeks ago when the video came out, it was like they were showing the evidence. This week they're back to focusing more on the sympathy factor. But at least they did include the video. But a lot of people just read the minimum and go with whatever the headline seems to suggest. It's still strange that they keep saying "elderly" though instead of simply listing his age which they know perfectly well.

Describing him as elderly may make the jury more sympathetic.

 

[sl222]

It just occurred to me, the Daily Mail is smart. They already know they'll get comments disputing their article when they say "elderly" which has that emotional content built right in. And comments heavily drive the readership.

 

[weepingangel]

The multiple open windows are obvious - even to this elderly lady wearing reading glasses- even in the less than high def Videos. Why does mr Winkleman and co. insist there was only one open window at the time ?
lies. All lies.

The only opened window?
I have been on The Voyager twice and The Explorer twice and those windows are opened by people and staff long before the time of Chloe’s death.

I took this photo in December on The Voyager for WS.
A uniformed lifeguard went along and opened the windows

View attachment 228329

 

[justice4allnow]

They already know they'll get comments disputing their article

It's called click-bait, and drives revenue, just as pay-for-play does

 

[they'll get you]

Think about it, what is the #1 reason people say as to why they ran into a sliding glass door?

Didn't see it.

Think about it. Why didn't they see it?

They were moving too fast, walkng into it, runnig into it.

Have you ever heard of anyone bumping into a glass door, or trying to step through a glass door, after they have stood in front of it for 30 seconds?

No.

Why?

Because that gives you ample time to see that the glass,
is in fact, right in front of you!

This man sued and won $21.5 mil for this

Yes the door closed on him but sheesh!!

I checked, his lawyer wasn’t MW. (Friedman)

 

[they'll get you]

And can you imagine standing in front of an OPEN sliding glass door for 30 seconds and not know if it was open or closed?

 

[ZoriahNZ]

The 3rd pic in this story from the Indy Star show the opposite of the story headline!

Family attorneys say cruise line's story of toddler's death is 'physically impossible'

I can't believe I never noticed it before looking at this very page. The guy blatantly has his hand outside of the window while measuring, and he isn't even leaning over the rail like SA clearly did in the CCTV footage.

Didn't SA also claim he reached out to try and touch/ knock at the window, then - upon meeting no resistance - leaned even closer towards the window????! It utterly strains credulity to think that even at that point (colour blind, nearsighted, whatever) he couldn't see the window was open based on the surrounding window sill, frame and handle.

RCCL should use Winkleman's own damning pic against him.

 

[Cool Cats]

This man sued and won $21.5 mil for this

Yes the door closed on him but sheesh!!

I checked, his lawyer wasn’t MW. (Friedman)

Wow! Thanks for finding this. 9 day trial very interesting. Here is the article about it:

James Hausman who suffered brain injury on Holland America cruise given $21.5m damages | Daily Mail Online

 

[Wehwalt]

There are a lot of differences between Hausman's case re HAL and this. For one thing, HAL set the electric eye beam on multiple ships for the door to open slowly and close quickly, likely to save on air conditioning. Second, there had been previous instances of people getting hurt from these on HAL. They went out of their way to blame the injured passenger. A big punitive damages award is what you sometimes get for refusing to settle.

 

[katydid23]

There are a lot of differences between Hausman's case re HAL and this. For one thing, HAL set the electric eye beam on multiple ships for the door to open slowly and close quickly, likely to save on air conditioning. Second, there had been previous instances of people getting hurt from these on HAL. They went out of their way to blame the injured passenger. A big punitive damages award is what you sometimes get for refusing to settle.

Also, the passenger, Hausman, didn't do anything reckless, as far as I can tell. Whereas Grandpa has a big hurdle to get over just because of his reckless behaviour and gross negligence. JMO

 

[Wehwalt]

Re: a jury view. This isn't a question of Florida law, but since the case is in federal court, it is a matter of federal civil procedure (I have no idea about PR law for the criminal case). There is a discussion of when one can be done in the below document starting on page 94, but to summarize: "it's up to the judge".

https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/district/guides/MJTP.pdf

There are no adverse inferences to be drawn against SA for not testifying unless he is a party. If he was, and as has been pointed out, in theory adverse inferences could be drawn against him for not testifying in the civil case, but the cases I see on a hasty glance that deal with that are talking about potential criminal charges. These are real. SA will not be called upon to testify or otherwise expose himself to questioning until the criminal case ends.

 

[Snoods]

If it goes to trial, be prepared to see a faux elderly, doddering, and colorblind SA shuffling into the courtroom using a white cane and a seeing eye dog. A walker or a wheelchair could also be used. Or all of the above. (They sure seem to be playing up the elderly and colorblind thing.)

His hands will be shaking, and he will continually hold his face in his hands as he tries to muster up tears. Notice how truly devastated people never have to hide their faces when they cry real tears?

Remember how Bill Cosby’s attorney’s oldened him up before his trial? One week he was carrying people on his shoulders and dancing around on stage, the next he was so feeble he needed a cane, a wheelchair, and was declared legally blind and needed a personal guide to help him around. Sneaky.

 

[Cool Cats]

If it goes to trial, be prepared to see a faux elderly, doddering, and colorblind SA shuffling into the courtroom using a white cane and a seeing eye dog. A walker or a wheelchair could also be used. Or all of the above. (They sure seem to be playing up the elderly and colorblind thing.)

His hands will be shaking, and he will continually hold his face in his hands as he tries to muster up tears. Notice how truly devastated people never have to hide their faces when they cry real tears?

Remember how Bill Cosby’s attorney’s oldened him up before his trial? One week he was carrying people on his shoulders and dancing around on stage, the next he was so feeble he needed a cane, a wheelchair, and was declared legally blind and needed a personal guide to help him around. Sneaky.

Dont forget this:

Column: Harvey Weinstein, the onetime Hollywood ‘God,’ brings his prop walker to first day of rape trial

"... the walker that in his mind makes him look frail and nonpredatory, almost as if it were a prop. .....For weeks through jury selection, Weinstein used that walker theatrically, as befits a savvy movie producer playing a kindly man in great pain deserving of much sympathy...."

Also, if I were the prosecutor I would put laser focus on grandpa's "frailty" and have it backfire on him. Get him to say he can't lift much which then shows he "knew" full well he shouldn't have been lifting her up in the air and foisting her forward, thus losing his grip. Just speculating different senarios.

 

[they'll get you]

If there is anyone on The Freedom Class or Voyager Class Royal Carribean Ships right now please safely safely get someone to take a photo of you putting just your arm out the window on deck 11.

 

[JerseySleuth17]

The Daily Mail (which I do like) is strange on this story. A few weeks ago when the video came out, it was like they were showing the evidence. This week they're back to focusing more on the sympathy factor. But at least they did include the video. But a lot of people just read the minimum and go with whatever the headline seems to suggest. It's still strange that they keep saying "elderly" though instead of simply listing his age which they know perfectly well.

It's even more than that, in almost every Daily Mail article although they refer to SA as an "elderly, color-blind grandfather" the articles DO NOT list his age! Of course if they described a 51-year-old man in that fashion it would be ludicrous but the fact that they use the description while intentionally leaving out his age speaks volumes. But at the end of the day it is the PR courtroom where the participants will have ALL the facts, including I strongly suspect eye witness testimony, that is going to matter.

 

[justice4allnow]

I have a question for the lawyers here. I remember the OJ case and when he was acquitted in the criminal trial, the family sued in a civil case and won. If Sam is acquitted or gets off lightly in this criminal case, it seems clear that the family will not bring a civil case against him. Can anyone else bring such a civil suit forward? We have heard statements from the family, such as 'everyone should have had a chance to know her', 'she loved people', 'she was destined for great things.' Can members of the public bring a civil suit against Sam to make him culpable for her death? Maybe any damages would go to a nonprofit benefiting children who suffer neglect/abuse. Sorry if I am being naive, but it seems so unfair to Chloe that he is being absolved of all blame by the family.

 

[In vino veritas]

But they can’t because that would be the end of their money grabbing lawsuit

But they can’t because that would be the end of their money grabbing lawsuit

Exactly my point!! I guess my sarcasm didn’t come through in my post.

I have a question for the lawyers here. I remember the OJ case and when he was acquitted in the criminal trial, the family sued in a civil case and won. If Sam is acquitted or gets off lightly in this criminal case, it seems clear that the family will not bring a civil case against him. Can anyone else bring such a civil suit forward? We have heard statements from the family, such as 'everyone should have had a chance to know her', 'she loved people', 'she was destined for great things.' Can members of the public bring a civil suit against Sam to make him culpable for her death? Maybe any damages would go to a nonprofit benefiting children who suffer neglect/abuse. Sorry if I am being naive, but it seems so unfair to Chloe that he is being absolved of all blame by the family.

IMO, I’m certain the Wiegands have not absolved SA of culpability in private. However, in the court of public opinion, they need to maintain SA’s innocence or their civil lawsuit falls apart.
IF a plea deal is ultimately offered to SA and is rejected, then $$$$ is clearly the main objective of this family. IMO, I believe this to be the case. Hence the family “ begging” PR prosecution to dismiss the case. A dismissal of the criminal case would remove a major impediment to the civil trial.

 

[justice4allnow]

The guy blatantly has his hand outside of the window while measuring, and he isn't even leaning over the rail like SA clearly did in the CCTV footage.RCCL should use Winkleman's own damning pic against him.

Good call! He's not straining at all, so easy to do!