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

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
So an important point is whether he's been on cruises or this cruise before.

Based on some of the things that Chloe's mother said in various interviews, I got the impression that the family group has not cruised previously. Chloe's mother couldn't understand why there would be windows that open on the 11th deck of the ship. Someone who has cruised previously would know that there are windows along the exterior of upper decks on the ship. Open areas where there are pools, hot tubs, lounge chairs, sports courts, water play pads, etc. are on upper decks of the ship aren't covered so guests can enjoy the sun and sea air. Around the perimeter of these decks, there are covered areas with tables and chairs for informal dining, playing cards/games, comfortable chairs/sofas where passengers can socialize. The covered areas can become very warm and humid because the decks are open to the elements. Opening some windows allows for ventilation and ocean breezes.
 
Last edited:
The deck was surrounded by clear windows. Anello told CBS he lifted Chloe up to let her bang on the glass.

a-group-of-people-standing-in-a-room-chloe-wiegand-1-died-july-7-2019-in-san-juan-puerto-rico-after-_534744_.jpg
© Photos provided by attorney Michael Winkleman from the Miami-based law firm Lipcon, Margulies, Alsin... Chloe Wiegand, 1, died July 7, 2019, in San Juan, Puerto Rico, after falling from a Royal Caribbean cruise ship.
"All I know is I was trying to reach the glass and I know that we leaned over to try to have her reach the glass, at that point she slipped," Anello said. "She slipped. She slipped."

Source: ‘She slipped': Grandfather speaks on 1-year-old’s fatal fall from Royal Caribbean cruise ship
----
I think these people may be the witnesses.. they are on the other side of the police tape and the ship didn't leave until 8:30pm that evening. What if they saw him dangling her or swinging her outside the window and that is what has led to the charges? We know the attorney has the video - does he also have witness statements? I've also seen photos on the pier with LE and tents - so there may be witnesses on the dock that saw it ?
 
"She slipped." Repeated 3 times. He repeats a lot of his statements several times in a row.

So a caregiver/relative depends on something external to hold up their child (the non-existent glass he searched for for 30 seconds)?? Who does that? Would I hold a 1 year old and think, "Her hand is against the wall, so I can hold her more loosely." NO!!! That's what he's saying.

He also says Chloe was already standing on the floor looking out of that window at the view just fine.
 
If the video of the incident shows that Chloe is actually outside the window frame at any time, or that Grandpa leaned forward enough for his head and/or shoulders to protrude through the window, the fact that he might be color blind isn't going to matter one whit. In either case, SA would have known that there was no window there regardless of whether or not it was tinted.
 
"She slipped." Repeated 3 times. He repeats a lot of his statements several times in a row.

So a caregiver/relative depends on something external to hold up their child (the non-existent glass he searched for for 30 seconds)?? Who does that? Would I hold a 1 year old and think, "Her hand is against the wall, so I can hold her more loosely." NO!!! That's what he's saying.

He also says Chloe was already standing on the floor looking out of that window at the view just fine.

the repetition (Palilalia) is interesting because it can be a symptom of neurological diseases Palilalia - Wikipedia

or just someone who is not necessarily being truthful...
 
If the video of the incident shows that Chloe is actually outside the window frame at any time, or that Grandpa leaned forward enough for his head and/or shoulders to protrude through the window, the fact that he might be color blind isn't going to matter one whit. In either case, SA would have known that there was no window there regardless of whether or not it was tinted.
This -and nor would it matter if he cruised before IMO
 
In several of his sentences he says micro-things that don't make sense or in some cases are the opposite of what he means, but when he's quoted, the assumptions are put in instead of his actual words.

I also noticed "I would never mess around with Chloe" or something like that. What I've read is that the points a person brings up are the sensitive areas. He was messing around here. Not acting like a careful adult.

Just like in the interview the mother gave where she raises the point "Sam has never, ever put our children in danger." Sensitive area, and this is exactly what he did. I'm not criticizing the mother though. They rushed into this interview; the child had only been gone about 10 days.

Talking to the media usually doesn't make things better. IMHO.
 
The CC video will be instrumental !

Did SA actually lean over and stick his face close to -- or out of -- the window before lifting up Chloe ?
Colorblind or not-- he had to have known the window was open.
Back in the deleted threads -- an article translated from PR into Eng. had the video of a PR LE or ship employee holding his hands outside the window and moving them in an up & down motion, then opening his hands, palms facing downwards.
 
I have to admit I just don't understand why this particular man is getting so much support from his family and community. A child died not in an accident but due to negligence. People have been treated a lot worse for doing a whole lot less.
 
I have to admit I just don't understand why this particular man is getting so much support from his family and community. A child died not in an accident but due to negligence. People have been treated a lot worse for doing a whole lot less.

Yes, it seems like this is less about justice for Chloe than it is justice for SA. Chloe's parents should be livid about Grandpa having been so careless and reckless with their child! Instead they seem to have already moved on from the untimely and tragic death of their daughter. All that matters now is protecting SA and keeping him out of prison.
 
Yes, it seems like this is less about justice for Chloe than it is justice for SA. Chloe's parents should be livid about Grandpa having been so careless and reckless with their child! Instead they seem to have already moved on from the untimely and tragic death of their daughter. All that matters now is protecting SA and keeping him out of prison.
That fact right there should give everyone involved in this case reason to really REALLY stop and consider things.
 
Yes, it seems like this is less about justice for Chloe than it is justice for SA. Chloe's parents should be livid about Grandpa having been so careless and reckless with their child! Instead they seem to have already moved on from the untimely and tragic death of their daughter. All that matters now is protecting SA and keeping him out of prison.
Let me surmise here that IF he is found guilty of neg. homicide... the parent's lawsuit and money will be at risk of disappearing like RCCL's window glass ?

I realize they are separate entities.
 
Last edited:
The sideshow that the lawyer and grandpa have created has taken attention away from the absolute tragedy of little Chloe’s death.
It's sad as money will not bring her back.
I'm curious what the relationship with SA and the parents was like before her death ?
Amicable ?
Tense ?
Didn't see each other very much so not much of a relationship to speak of ?
 
The parents must have felt anger and must have more angry feelings to come. The rage would be so hard. And they have Chloe's big brother who has been traumatized. If you have a family member who you know is a totally responsible and sensible person, and an accident happens, that's one thing. But this person is not like that. I get the feeling he has to be monitored already in some ways by his wife. I so wouldn't want to be her. My impression from all I looked at since July is this is a close family. And SA adores the grandchildren. But he isn't a careful person (my impression). Not intentionally but a lot of men do boneheadedly stupid things with children. In the parents' shoes I wouldn't want to be around him. I wonder if they too are still in shock and just leaning on this crusade against RCCL to get through this. BUT I think that SA may have given them a false impression of what really happened. If so then there will be hell to pay. I think maybe he clings to the hope that those moments won't be known. But this is just my ramblings and I feel horrible for the family. I just wish for their sake they had opted to stay out of the limelight completely and let the wheels of justice turn. I can understand their initial response to avoid questioning and statements and to get legal representation to learn things they could need to know, because for people in the law that is just basic common sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
177
Guests online
1,803
Total visitors
1,980

Forum statistics

Threads
606,075
Messages
18,197,929
Members
233,727
Latest member
lillianlily
Back
Top