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

[SaguaroSpirit]

This made me realize that Winkleman is already aggressively negotiating with RCCL for a settlement before the trial happens. The threat of a lawsuit, the supportive comments, the interview, all trying to put pressure on RCCL to just settle.

I hope the family doesn't get one lousy cent from RCCL. And from this day forward, SA is not allowed to be around children without direct supervision. JMOO

 

[Montrealaise]

Yes, I'm sure that is true.There is nothing worse than losing a child, and that their own father or stepfather is being accused of being responsible in some way for the child's death must make it even harder for them. They are grieving but at the same time they are trying to protect their family member from being convicted of a crime.
I can't even imagine the family publicly accusing him of being responsible.
How would that help anything? Publicly blaming the grandfather is not going to ease their pain.

Imo

I don't think people want or expect the family to publicly blame the grandfather - instead, they want the family to stop publicly blaming the cruise line. Because it wasn't the cruise line's fault.

 

[sl222]

Why are some people never going to just sympathize unless the parents go public blaming SA? They are still victims, in mourning, no matter what they say publically or what lawsuit they might file. They don't owe anyone their deepest thoughts and feelings. I would think they are ALL still in shock. MOO

You'd need to read everything in both threads before saying that people here are not tremendously sympathetic to the parents for their loss.

 

[oviedo]

In time their feelings will change, if they have not already. It is so shocking to lose a family member to death. My father killed my mother when I was a teen, in what he claimed was an accident. My other siblings and I at first viewed the police as our enemy-they were trying to take away our father and we had just lost our mother. I think that it is some kind of self-protective instinct to view a family member as incapable of wrong, otherwise it's too much to comprehend. As the months passed and the shock wore off, we began to look differently at what he had done and even at who he was, as a person. Once this family has gone through a full year of being without their beloved Chloe, they will no doubt feel very differently about him.

I’m so sorry for your loss and I agree - give it a year and let’s see how mom feels toward the stepfather married to her mother and how he caused the loss of her beloved Chloe through stupid reckless behavior and never publicly took responsibility for his role in her premature death
JMO

 

[sl222]

I’m so sorry for your loss and I agree - give it a year and let’s see how mom feels toward the stepfather married to her mother and how he caused the loss of her beloved Chloe through stupid reckless behavior and never publicly took responsibility for his role in her premature death
JMO

I'm so sorry for your loss too.

This was such a bizarre event. It was heartbreaking to hear about the mother during the funeral and what she shared about Chloe. The parents may still be in shock to a large degree too. I doubt they felt like celebrating Thanksgiving but just braved the day for others' sake.

Winkleman showed the video to CBS. So he got it from the defense attorney. I agree that the defense attorney would never think it wise to go on television and do an interview. No way.

SA works or at least worked in an information technology job; he is probably intelligent. But as far as being around a toddler I expect he is usually with his wife. He and Chloe had just exited the kids' pool area and walked a few feet to the window - is the idea I'm getting. Now they were in the lounge area lined with tables and lounge chairs all against the windows. It looks close to the kids' pool area but the entire floor is not a kids area. That area does not look like a kids' area.

 

[MsBetsy]

I don't think people want or expect the family to publicly blame the grandfather - instead, they want the family to stop publicly blaming the cruise line. Because it wasn't the cruise line's fault.

I wouldn't think people would expect the family to publicly blame the grandfather either, but some people seem to think they should acknowledge or even be angry at the grandfather because he is responsible for the child's death.

I think people's emotions are mixed and very complex when it comes to situations like this.

It's natural to put the blame on something else, and in this case the family seems to put the blame on the Cruiseline as opposed to the grandfather. They seem to be very defensive of him and his actions.

This is why I believe they are blaming the Cruiseline in the first place. They are not willing to admit he did anything to cause the death of their child.

Imo

 

[MsBetsy]

This made me realize that Winkleman is already aggressively negotiating with RCCL for a settlement before the trial happens. The threat of a lawsuit, the supportive comments, the interview, all trying to put pressure on RCCL to just settle.

That's exactly what I think!

I thought maybe the family was hoping for a settlement before the lawsuit was even filed, hoping that it will support their case, and it would be used as evidence that the grandfather was not solely responsible.

But it was suggested that even if there was a settlement, the documents would not be made public and it could not be used as evidence in a trial.

Is this true? Is there a lawyer who can explain this? If the Cruiseline offers a settlement or someone is found responsible would the family be able to use that as evidence in a trial?

Imo

 

[Montrealaise]

That's exactly what I think!

I thought maybe the family was hoping for a settlement before the lawsuit was even filed, hoping that it will support their case, and it would be used as evidence that the grandfather was not solely responsible.

But it was suggested that even if there was a settlement, the documents would not be made public and it could not be used as evidence in a trial.

Is this true? Is there a lawyer who can explain this? If the Cruiseline offers a settlement or someone is found responsible would the family be able to use that as evidence in a trial?

Imo

Even if the details of the settlement weren't made public - and these settlements almost always have a confidentiality clause - the fact that the cruise line settled at all could be construed as admission of fault on their part and could encourage other passengers who suffered mishaps while cruising to sue the cruise line, even if they were 100% at fault.

 

[al66pine]

Evidence of Cruiseline's Negligence?
@MsBetsy bbm on your post below
bbm(1) parents hoping for outcome showing cruiseline negligence. I agree; that's what they want.

bbm(2) If parents had evd of negligence, why could they not present in ct? Evd of neg, like what? Like a passenger's vid w G'pa holding Chloe at window, when close by a drunken cruiseline employee moves deck chairs around and KAPOW, he bumps chair into G'pa, causing Chloe to fly out of his arms, thru the window? Clumsy employees?
Yep, that could be presented as evd. in civil case.

bbm(3) At crim trial, as defense, could G'pa possibly use use as evd of cruiseline negligence - Settlement & Release document which parents & cruiseline signed?
Nope. It's a virtual certainty the (hypo) Settlement and Release document would (1) explicitly deny cruiseline's responsibility for any role in events leading to Chloe's death and (2) contain a confidentiality clause, prohibiting both parties from disclosing S & R terms or otherwise making them public.
In G'pa's crim trial, parents are not parties, cruiseline is not a party. So how would g'pa 's defense atty get copy of Settlemt & Release to present it? Even if def atty tried to present, once judge would see denial terms & confidentiality term, judge would rule it inadmissible.
jmo

I would think the Cruiseline would deny responsibility as well. And yes, that would not help his case, and I'm guessing the family is aware of this. It is only if they admit negligence and offer a settlement that it might take the blame off of the grandfather, which I'm assuming is what they are hoping for.
But I still think they are waiting and hoping for an outcome that would show negligence on the part of the Ship. If they were so sure that the ship is responsible, then why have they not filed yet? What else could they be waiting for?
If the family had proof of the ships negligence, why would they not be able to present that evidence in court? Especially if the defense is that he was not entirely at fault and something else is to blame.
Can't it still be used as evidence without it being made public? And if not, why?
Sometimes it is made public that the parties have agreed on a settlement but they do not disclose the amount or any details contained in the document.
Imo

 

[MsBetsy]

Even if the details of the settlement weren't made public - and these settlements almost always have a confidentiality clause - the fact that the cruise line settled at all could be construed as admission of fault on their part and could encourage other passengers who suffered mishaps while cruising to sue the cruise line, even if they were 100% at fault.

Yes, any settlement would be an admission of fault, I would think, even if the details were not disclosed to the public.
I think the family is hesitant in filing because they are hoping to settle before they have to file.

The question I have is whether or not the findings can be used in court.

In the meantime they still have managed to get the word out in the media through the lawyer that they believe the Cruiseline is negligent which takes the focus off the grandfather.

Imo

 

[MsBetsy]

Evidence of Cruiseline's Negligence?
@MsBetsy bbm on your post below
bbm(1) parents hoping for outcome showing cruiseline negligence. I agree; that's what they want.

bbm(2) If parents had evd of negligence, why could they not present in ct? Evd of neg, like what? Like a passenger's vid w G'pa holding Chloe at window, when close by a drunken cruiseline employee moves deck chairs around and KAPOW, he bumps chair into G'pa, causing Chloe to fly out of his arms, thru the window? Clumsy employees?
Yep, that could be presented as evd. in civil case.

bbm(3) At crim trial, as defense, could G'pa possibly use use as evd of cruiseline negligence - Settlement & Release document which parents & cruiseline signed?
Nope. It's a virtual certainty the (hypo) Settlement and Release document would (1) explicitly deny cruiseline's responsibility for any role in events leading to Chloe's death and (2) contain a confidentiality clause, prohibiting both parties from disclosing S & R terms or otherwise making them public.
In G'pa's crim trial, parents are not parties, cruiseline is not a party. So how would g'pa 's defense atty get copy of Settlemt & Release to present it? Even if def atty tried to present, once judge would see denial terms & confidentiality term, judge would rule it inadmissible.
jmo

Are you sure the judge would rule any evidence suggesting another party is at fault inadmissible?
Would the denial terms and confidentiality terms apply to the court as well as the public?
Do you have a link to more information as to whether it would be admissible or not?
I'm not familiar with how all this works in a criminal trial.

 

[MaryG12]

In time their feelings will change, if they have not already. It is so shocking to lose a family member to death. My father killed my mother when I was a teen, in what he claimed was an accident. My other siblings and I at first viewed the police as our enemy-they were trying to take away our father and we had just lost our mother. I think that it is some kind of self-protective instinct to view a family member as incapable of wrong, otherwise it's too much to comprehend. As the months passed and the shock wore off, we began to look differently at what he had done and even at who he was, as a person. Once this family has gone through a full year of being without their beloved Chloe, they will no doubt feel very differently about him.

Very sorry about the loss of your mother.

That is why I said in a previous post, Chloe's parents do not want to lose SA to jail, they have already lost one family member to death (Chloe).

It is human nature to want to protect your own (the proverbial blood is thicker than water) even where the law is concerned. The problem with protecting your own, you think the family, in a way, wins, but the reality is, there are no winners, no winners for justice, Chloe is still gone, and that is not a good thing.

 

[10ofRods]

In time their feelings will change, if they have not already. It is so shocking to lose a family member to death. My father killed my mother when I was a teen, in what he claimed was an accident. My other siblings and I at first viewed the police as our enemy-they were trying to take away our father and we had just lost our mother. I think that it is some kind of self-protective instinct to view a family member as incapable of wrong, otherwise it's too much to comprehend. As the months passed and the shock wore off, we began to look differently at what he had done and even at who he was, as a person. Once this family has gone through a full year of being without their beloved Chloe, they will no doubt feel very differently about him.

Sincerest sympathy for your loss and the situation you found yourself in. You came out of it with a lot of wisdom. I had a friend whose father was responsible for the death of her mother. She was an only child and a freshman in university when it happened. For about a year, she stood staunchly by her father (she now lived 400 miles away), but her life slowly started to spin downward. She went from pure grief to incomprehension and depression. Last time I talked to her at length, she was in a deep phase of anger at her father and she had dropped out of university. She's now out of touch with her friends from home. It's been really hard.

I agree that an entire year without Chloe, the missed holidays and milestones, will gradually wear down this first response. Lawyers know this too, they've seen it a lot. I can think of lots of ways this may eventually play out, but bottom line is that no family should have to go through this.

 

[LietKynes]

Thank you! I'm sure it's wise of him not to make a statement.
I wonder if he has advised the grandfather not to speak to the media since it doesn't seem to be helping his case.
He should also tell the family to get the other lawyer to stop talking. I wonder if there is a lack of communication or disagreement between the family as to how to go about handling the case.
Isn't Chloe's mother a lawyer or a judge or something? Maybe the lawsuit was her idea.

Imo

bbm

Could be.
Raises many more questions.
When was this fraudulent lawsuit blaming a cruise line concocted ?
The lawyer was hired before the baby was even buried.

Someone said she was a lawyer, but is now a judge ?

 

[borndem]

Please excuse if a repeat --

Grandfather Accused in Girl's Fatal Fall from Cruise Ship: 'I Thought There Was Glass'

The attorney for the family of 18-month-old Chloe Wiegand says her grandfather, Salvatore Anello, is not to blame for what they see as a a tragic accident

By Jeff Truesdell
November 26, 2019 04:09 PM
The Indiana man charged in the July death of his 18-month-old granddaughter who fell from a cruise ship docked in Puerto Rico says he was in “disbelief” and “shock” when he realized what had happened.

Speaking to CBS This Morning in his first sit-down interview after being charged with negligent homicide, the grandfather, Salvatore Anello, described holding the little girl against a railing adjacent to what he thought was a bank of closed windows in a children’s play area of the Royal Caribbean ship. But as she slipped from his grasp, the girl fell through an open window onto a dock 10 stories below.

“I remember trying to find her on the floor and then I saw her fall, I saw her fall, I saw her fall and I was just in disbelief,” said Anello. “And I was like ‘Oh my God.’ And I think for a while I was in shock and I was just standing there.”

Grandfather Accused in Girl's Fatal Fall from Cruise Ship: 'I Thought There Was Glass'

 

[justbreathe]

Why are some people never going to just sympathize unless the parents go public blaming SA? They are still victims, in mourning, no matter what they say publically or what lawsuit they might file. They don't owe anyone their deepest thoughts and feelings. I would think they are ALL still in shock. MOO

Because they are blaming a window and a ship instead of the person who dropped her 11 stories and it reeks of not accepting responsibility and wanting a cash payout. If they don’t want to share their feelings then they should have stayed quiet and not said “Sam is so great and he cries, windows should never be open” because now we all think they are delusional.

 

[justice4allnow]

Because they are blaming a window and a ship instead of the person who dropped her 11 stories and it reeks of not accepting responsibility and wanting a cash payout. If they don’t want to share their feelings then they should have stayed quiet and not said “Sam is so great and he cries, windows should never be open” because now we all think they are delusional.

I just watched the video again of Winkleman putting his spin on what happened immediately after, on July 9th. He says that Sam put her on the rail and she leaned forward to bang on the glass and she was gone. Now just a few days ago we watched Sam act out how it happened, with him having one arm around her and him reaching out to bang on the glass with his other arm, and she slipped out of his arm. These are two completely different scenarios! Do they think that the public doesn't remember what is said, do they not realize that social media is permanent?? So bizarre...

 

[sl222]

I just watched the video again of Winkleman putting his spin on what happened immediately after, on July 9th. He says that Sam put her on the rail and she leaned forward to bang on the glass and she was gone. Now just a few days ago we watched Sam act out how it happened, with him having one arm around her and him reaching out to bang on the glass with his other arm, and she slipped out of his arm. These are two completely different scenarios! Do they think that the public doesn't remember what is said, do they not realize that social media is permanent?? So bizarre...

I agree that these versions are very different; no one said before he was holding her with one hand, and SA didn't say she leaned forward.

But a lot of the public really doesn't remember or pay attention except to what they're reading at that moment.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

I agree that these versions are very different; no one said before he was holding her with one hand, and SA didn't say she leaned forward.

But a lot of the public really doesn't remember or pay attention except to what they're reading at that moment.

They should, because it's important. I've said it before in other posts, and at the risk of repeating myself--- WHEN STORIES CHANGE, THAT'S A HUGE RED FLAG. It happened one way, not all kinds of different ways. SOMEONE'S not telling the truth.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Because they are blaming a window and a ship instead of the person who dropped her 11 stories and it reeks of not accepting responsibility and wanting a cash payout. If they don’t want to share their feelings then they should have stayed quiet and not said “Sam is so great and he cries, windows should never be open” because now we all think they are delusional.

^^Oh, heck yes, this post right here^^ and as time goes on and more facts come to light, we shall see what really happened and why. IMOO