IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #2

[oviedo]

Winkleman’s the reason RCCL have their muscles flexed.
They gave condolences and I also saw they helped with accomodation/transport for the family during the PR inquiries and transport of Chloé back home.

Grandfather Charged Over Toddler's Death on Cruise Ship

Double post

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

That makes perfect sense. Her legs and knees would be outside the ledge, that's just inexcusable if that's what happened.

Because...she could have gotten a great (and non fatal) view from the bottom row of windows. It's all changed now from "she wanted to be picked up to bang on the glass" which was being said by MW immediately after it happened. If the story keeps changing, something is a lie!

 

[they'll get you]

I believe the grandfather realized the window was opened. He made that statement in order to reflect the blame on someone else specifically the cruise line. The gf is sticking to the statement. This reminds me of child lying about something he did wrong in order to stay out of trouble.

This last summer both of my grandson’s were visiting me. The younger grandson (13 years old) was in the kitchen making a grilled cheese sandwich while he was watching it most likely out of boredom he began flipping the spatula near a french porcelain butter dish on the counter, suddenly he drops the spatula, I asking him what happened after hearing a banging sound, he said nothing Grandma. I realized later flipping the spatula and dropping on my butter dish caused a small chip on the platter. He didn’t want to fuss up to what happened.

Unfortunately you can’t compare what the Grandfather did to a child telling a fib.

I’ve thought my vehicle windows were open when they are ultra clean.

I’m sure Winkleman has asked when those windows were last cleaned as they do get covered with salt spray. Clean or opaque would make a difference and they don’t get cleaned after every voyage.

 

[IceIce9]

That makes perfect sense. Her legs and knees would be outside the ledge, that's just inexcusable if that's what happened.

Unfortunately people will always push the limits. Look at the tragedies that result from efforts to obtain selfies.

I recently went on a very rugged trek in Alaska. At one point we hiked past the edge of a glacier, and we were warned by our guides not to get any closer to the glacier. There were also several warning signs that we hiked past.

Yet two members of the group lagged behind, climbed up on to the glacier, walked out and took selfies. They gleefully shared the photos with the rest of the group when we stopped for the night, and they were sternly reprimanded by the group leaders.

They just shrugged and one said, “There is no way I would walk past a glacier without getting a picture for Facebook.”

 

[they'll get you]

That makes perfect sense. Her legs and knees would be outside the ledge, that's just inexcusable if that's what happened.

The railing of one foot away BUT higher than the window sill so it’s feasible that Chloe was sitting on the rail and her feet were on the window sill so if she leaned forward she’d slip off the rail and straight down across the sill and again down.
IMO.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

DBM

 

[sl222]

The railing of one foot away BUT higher than the window sill so it’s feasible that Chloe was sitting on the rail and her feet were on the window sill so if she leaned forward she’d slip off the rail and straight down across the sill and again down.
IMO.

I agree. And with the lawyer saying she "disappeared," there has been not one word to suggest that the GF was aware that she was slipping out of his grasp. No matter how fast that happened you would feel it and try to grab the child. No word of that at all. If he didn't feel her slipping out and didn't have the wherewithal to try to grab her (If, bcs idk what happened), then that too suggests something was definitely not okay with the GF.

I am not buying that the family doesn't know he has some degree of poor judgment at times. But on the other hand, this thing was completely unforeseeable by the rest of the family. If only his wife or the parents had been there they would have immediately stopped him from lifting her up there. It is SO high up to hold a toddler; how could he not immediately recognize that this was a precarious situation due to the height (near chest level) and the fact that an 18-month-old weighs more than a feather and they move around, and the fact that he is not an agile individual. It would have been risky for anyone to do.

It makes me think that Chloe didn't even ask to be picked up; she could already see. (pure speculation)

Without seeing the videos of different angles there are still too many possibilities of how they were positioned and what exactly happened.

 

[sl222]

I know we've said it here often but it bears repeating that Chloe Wiegand was beautiful and absolutely adorable and obviously happy and loved. People are upset about this because they care about what happened to this little girl and how all children are treated.

Totally different point next: I wouldn't have come up with this on my own, but from my reading around over the years I have a very negative interpretation of the one statement that SA has made. "They can't do anything worse to me than what has already happened." That statement pisses me off in many ways. He would have been way better off to say nothing.

 

[al66pine]

Could Cruiseline Name SA as 3rd Party Defendant? Winkleman. Potential Conflict of Interest?

....

It’s not a conflict if all clients are advised of potential conflict and all agree that it’s not a problem for any of them....
As far as SA hiring Winkleman for civil suit? Maybe....
SA with family against RCCL makes a stronger statement....

@Midwestmom2019 bbm sbm
Looking at bbm and bringing up two questions.
1) Might judge/jury view SA's lawsuit as a shirttail offensive, just along for the ride?

2) From civil procedure standpoint, after parents' wrongful death claim is filed (ASSuming, it is filed) against cruiseline, is it possible cruiseline could name G'father SA as a third party defendant in impleader action? * If that were to happen, then how could Winkleman continue to represent both the parents and SA? The interests of the parents and the interests of SA would be directly adverse to one another, per conflict rule.** Seems Winkeman would be obligated to withdraw from rep'ing one (or both?).
What would downside for cruiseline be, in moving to implead SA as 3rd party defendant?

------------------------------------------------
* Impleader is a procedural device before trial in which one party joins a third party into a lawsuit because that third party is liable to an original defendant. Using the vocabulary of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the defendant seeks to become a third-party plaintiff by filing a third party complaint against a third party not presently party to the lawsuit, who thereby becomes a third-party defendant. This complaint alleges that the third party is liable for all or part of the damages that the original plaintiff may win from the original defendant.... Common bases of contingent or derivative liability by which third parties may be impleaded include indemnity, subrogation,...." Impleader - Wikipedia

** Rule 1.7: Conflict of Interest: Current Clients
Client-Lawyer Relationship
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A concurrent conflict of interest exists if:
(1) the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client; or
(2) there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest of the lawyer.
(b) Notwithstanding ...
Rule 1.7: Conflict of Interest: Current Clients See comments there.
^ From ABA model code, not specifically FL statute or FL Ct Rule re atty conflict of interest.

 

[they'll get you]

Would he sit Chloé on this railing?
I actually think he might.



It really is a wonder more children don’t fall overboard.

It’s telling how obvious that parents watch their children.

 

[Montrealaise]

The railing of one foot away BUT higher than the window sill so it’s feasible that Chloe was sitting on the rail and her feet were on the window sill so if she leaned forward she’d slip off the rail and straight down across the sill and again down.
IMO.

Also, the rail has a rounded, not flat, top - so it would be easy to slip off if you were sitting on it (which was obviously never its intended purpose)

 

[oviedo]

Would he sit Chloé on this railing?
I actually think he might.
View attachment 217400


It really is a wonder more children don’t fall overboard.

It’s telling how obvious that parents watch their children.

The balcony is a precarious spot - when you look at the window with the railing as pictured - I just cannot imagine allowing a child to sit anywhere near that -but if you are reckless you might do it and that’s what I think SA did ... and we have a dead child now
JMO

 

[oviedo]

The balcony is a precarious spot - when you look at the window with the railing as pictured - I just cannot imagine allowing a child to sit anywhere near that -but if you are reckless you might do it and that’s what I think SA did ... and we have a dead child now
JMO

And one more thing - note the railing is higher than the window ledge / he would have had to lift her over that to sit her on the ledge if that’s what he did / no doubt the video shows her position
IMO

 

[MsMarple]

Dad was taking pictures immediately bc he’s a detective. They photograph everything before someone gets a chance to disturb the scene of the crime.
A criminal defense lawyer suggested to a commenter off the timeline thread that SA was advised to hire civil lawyer to deflect the impact of the criminal charges that were sure to come. I thought that was very interesting criminal defense strategy. And maybe why Winkleman continues to beat his drum. Plus, of course, his bank account.

Interesting and yeah, the best defense is a good offense. So maybe that's why they hired Winkleman so soon. "Ambulance chasing" is illegal in Florida so it had to be a family member who contacted him. Even a referral from a third party is against Fl. bar regs.

Winkleman must have thought there was a decent case, at least in the hours right after Chloe's fall. And after gathering information IMO he'd have declined to represent the family if it didn't look like a good case. I know he was quoted in msm back in July saying he was waiting to view the video before making a decision as to whether or not to sue so I have to wonder if the video has him nervous now, given some of his recent backpedaling. MOO.

 

[they'll get you]

The balcony is a precarious spot - when you look at the window with the railing as pictured - I just cannot imagine allowing a child to sit anywhere near that -but if you are reckless you might do it and that’s what I think SA did ... and we have a dead child now
JMO

Thank you for showing the rail with an arrow.

I would be able to circle both my thumbs and my middle fingers around it. That’s how big it is, flat on the bottom and curved around the top.

 

[MsMarple]

I believe the grandfather realized the window was opened. He made that statement in order to reflect the blame on someone else specifically the cruise line. The gf is sticking to the statement. This reminds me of child lying about something he did wrong in order to stay out of trouble.

This last summer both of my grandson’s were visiting me. The younger grandson (13 years old) was in the kitchen making a grilled cheese sandwich while he was watching it most likely out of boredom he began flipping the spatula near a french porcelain butter dish on the counter, suddenly he drops the spatula, I asking him what happened after hearing a banging sound, he said nothing Grandma. I realized later flipping the spatula and dropping on my butter dish caused a small chip on the platter. He didn’t want to fuss up to what happened.

Unfortunately you can’t compare what the Grandfather did to a child telling a fib.

Yes, that same image crossed my mind; that SA was responding like a child caught doing something naughty. Mind you IMO it was an adult version, meaning who knows what ran through his mind in those first seconds when Chloe fell. But right from the outset when I read that his words were "I dropped my child! I didn't know there was no glass!" I couldn't help but think why did he immediately start defending his actions?

Me? I probably would have just screamed Chloe's name and "Oh God!" over and over. Not CYA words. But hey, we don't even know for sure those were SA's words as the video has no sound. Where did they even come from? Hmm...

 

[oviedo]

Thank you for showing the rail with an arrow.

I would be able to circle both my thumbs and my middle fingers around it. That’s how big it is, flat on the bottom and curved around the top.

And I can’t imagine sitting a child on either surface - I can only imagine the video they collected and my guess is since the civil attorney has access to this discovery he’s working with the criminal attorney IMO

 

[BeachSky]

Video shows girl's final moments with grandfather before cruise ship death

Winkleman said Anello didn't realize there was no glass directly in front of him.
Within five seconds Chloe falls more than 100 feet below.

"She's sitting on the wooden banister, why did he then lean forward with her?" Begnaud asked Winkleman.

-"I think it's pretty obvious why they leaned forward, and that would be so that you could get a better view," Winkleman said.

"What do you say to the fact that he raised her and put her on this banister which the cruise line might argue was not meant for young children to be sitting on?" Begnaud asked.

"If that was the case and they want no one to sit on it, they should say no one should sit on it. … There's no sign that says that. There's no warning, no nothing," Winkleman said.

"The only way that you can prove or disprove anything that Sam said is based on the video and based on his testimony … Those are the only pieces of evidence you have," Winkleman said. "There were no eye witnesses. There's no one who's come forward to tell any different story. … So all you have is Sam's testimony, his story and the video."

After Chloe fell out of the window, Anello drops to his knees, according to Winkleman, and he yelled out loud, "I just dropped my child. I thought there was glass! I thought there was glass!"


above BBM
IMO Winkleman set the -no glass- narrative (before viewing video)
now he’s moved to the -leaning forward to get a better view- narrative(post viewing). followed up with -there was no SIGN,no witnesses,no one telling a different story.
Sadly I think he would blame Ship staff if they were anywhere near the tragedy.SMH!

MOO

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Video shows girl's final moments with grandfather before cruise ship death

Winkleman said Anello didn't realize there was no glass directly in front of him.
Within five seconds Chloe falls more than 100 feet below.

"She's sitting on the wooden banister, why did he then lean forward with her?" Begnaud asked Winkleman.

-"I think it's pretty obvious why they leaned forward, and that would be so that you could get a better view," Winkleman said.

"What do you say to the fact that he raised her and put her on this banister which the cruise line might argue was not meant for young children to be sitting on?" Begnaud asked.

"If that was the case and they want no one to sit on it, they should say no one should sit on it. … There's no sign that says that. There's no warning, no nothing," Winkleman said.

"The only way that you can prove or disprove anything that Sam said is based on the video and based on his testimony … Those are the only pieces of evidence you have," Winkleman said. "There were no eye witnesses. There's no one who's come forward to tell any different story. … So all you have is Sam's testimony, his story and the video."

After Chloe fell out of the window, Anello drops to his knees, according to Winkleman, and he yelled out loud, "I just dropped my child. I thought there was glass! I thought there was glass!"


above BBM
IMO Winkleman set the -no glass- narrative (before viewing video)
now he’s moved to the -leaning forward to get a better view- narrative(post viewing). followed up with -there was no SIGN,no witnesses,no one telling a different story.
Sadly I think he would blame Ship staff if they were anywhere near the tragedy.SMH!

MOO

I cannot find the links now, but I had read on MSM that there were several eyewitnesses, both guests and ship employees.

 

[oviedo]

I cannot find the links now, but I had read on MSM that there were several eyewitnesses, both guests and ship employees.

Yes there were witnesses - links are in the media thread - the attorney may be spinning a story IMO - this would be part of discovery I believe