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

[sl222]

Here are 2 photos of SA holding Chloe, in both cases, to me, it looks like she's being held a little awkwardly. In the second one, he's holding her from underneath her. In the first one, she is seated on him but he has one arm around her also awkwardly. Maybe this is just a brief second but really from at least the photo where he's standing, she could fall. This is probably too picky of me. But I noticed this from the start because they put the new stories showed these photos from the beginning.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Here are 2 photos of SA holding Chloe, in both cases, to me, it looks like she's being held a little awkwardly. In the second one, he's holding her from underneath her. In the first one, she is seated on him but he has one arm around her also awkwardly. Maybe this is just a brief second but really from at least the photo where he's standing, she could fall. This is probably too picky of me. But I noticed this from the start because they put the new stories showed these photos from the beginning.

That's very observant. It does seem awkward. MOO

 

[SpanishInquisition]

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.

What the public thinks doesn't really matter as this is giving ammunition to the prosecutor. Now the prosecutor has a video of him re-enacting how he put her on a windowsill, barely was holding her and then he leaned forward. I think him showing that he only held her with one arm and that he used a closed fist while doing so will be prosecutorial gold, which the prosecutors until then might not have had a video showing that he used a closed fist, which to me seems quite damning.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

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.

I think SA lied initially, which is why the family defended him. Now I think there might be slow-motion distance happening once the contents of the video came out. What SA originally attributed to Chloe was actually all his doing - he unilaterally picked her up and he unilaterally leaned forward rather than her asking to be picked up and her trying to knock on the glass resulting in her fall.

 

[al66pine]

Settlement Agreement Documents & Possible Evd at Trial ?
@MsBetsy quoting from your post below.
"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."
If cruiseline & parents reach a settlement before crim trial against G'pa, w language the attys draft and that parents sign and executives/officials of RCCL sign, it's a virtual certainty, that the doc. will have terms/clauses which include --
--- cruiseline denial of any responsibility in events leading to Chloe's death, and
--- a confidentiality clause, prohibiting parties from disclosing the settlement terms, perhaps even prohibiting disclosing that a settlement was reached.

If a def atty tries to introduce a settlement document into evd at the crim trial, what would happen? How could the prosecutor or judge know this doc is not just several sheets of paper that some nefarious evil doer dreamed up, printed out, and forged all the signatures on, then provided to def atty? To prevent a bogus doc like that from being admitted, the atty offering it has to "lay a foundation to authenticate," to prove that the people whose signatures appear on the document are the ones who actually signed it.

Now, how to do that? Call as witnesses the people who purportedly signed the document, that is, call the parents and the RCCL executives? Then ask, 'is this your signature?' Well a virtual certainty, that's not gonna happen. Because, it would mean the trial judge would be allowing def atty to force parents and RCCL to breach their settlement agreement, a lawful agreement, by compelling them to disclose/discuss it.

Well, how about calling to the witness stand the atty who rep'ed parents and atty who rep'ed cruiseline, to vouch for the signatures? Nope, would violate attorney-client privilege.

Even if def atty could lay the foundation and jump that authentication obstacle, then what about the content of the doc, in which RCCL specifically denied liability for any role in the death?
In non-legalese, w no magic words: By signing the (hypo) doc, the parents acknowledged that RCCL was not responsible in any way, shape or form, and RCCL did not do a darned thing wrong.
So if (in hypo Settlement Agreement doc) RCCL denied responsibility and if parents acknowledged that, then no admission of RCCL's liability, so not relevant or material as evidence in crim trial.
[sorry to shout]

Inviting any verified atty's to throw in their 2 cts, to clarify or correct ^. jmo

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

 

[katydid23]

Here are 2 photos of SA holding Chloe, in both cases, to me, it looks like she's being held a little awkwardly. In the second one, he's holding her from underneath her. In the first one, she is seated on him but he has one arm around her also awkwardly. Maybe this is just a brief second but really from at least the photo where he's standing, she could fall. This is probably too picky of me. But I noticed this from the start because they put the new stories showed these photos from the beginning.

YES, especially the bottom picture. Holding her from only underneath is not a safe way to hold a very young child. If she suddenly decided to lurch forward, she would most likely fall. And babies do unexpected sudden movements like that.

 

[jeena]

Here are 2 photos of SA holding Chloe, in both cases, to me, it looks like she's being held a little awkwardly. In the second one, he's holding her from underneath her. In the first one, she is seated on him but he has one arm around her also awkwardly. Maybe this is just a brief second but really from at least the photo where he's standing, she could fall. This is probably too picky of me. But I noticed this from the start because they put the new stories showed these photos from the beginning.

I saw a photo of them on an outdoor chair, it appeared Chloe was sitting on his arm (while he was using the arm rest) instead of his lap, causing her head to be above his. I thought Chloe could have easily lost her balance seated on his arm with no support. Additionally, his belly protrudes, so it could have been a factor in Chloe not being able to grab onto him to prevent her fall. Chloe was wearing a bathing suit, her big white hat and shoes, it's hard to imagine he lost sight of her and thought she fell in front of him. I don't believe he didn't know the window was open after I saw the photos, the rail looks too close to the window for someone not to know if it's opened or closed.
What I don't get is how does a passenger open or close the window. Do they go on the window side of the rail? Are passengers allowed to be on that side of the rail?

 

[sl222]

I saw a photo of them on an outdoor chair, it appeared Chloe was sitting on his arm (while he was using the arm rest) instead of his lap, causing her head to be above his. I thought Chloe could have easily lost her balance seated on his arm with no support. ...

Is this the one? I had only seen part of it.

In this photo taken in the airport after the event, he looks close to his actual age. Big difference, probably because I would imagine that he wasn't eating much in the days following what happened and his face was not puffy like in other photos. If he did drink (beers or whatever) under normal circumstances, he probably was not then. He was possibly on anxiety medication at that point. The family moved to a hotel sometime in the days after this happened.

 

[jeena]

I saw a photo of them on an outdoor chair, it appeared Chloe was sitting on his arm (while he was using the arm rest) instead of his lap, causing her head to be above his. I thought Chloe could have easily lost her balance seated on his arm with no support. Additionally, his belly protrudes, so it could have been a factor in Chloe not being able to grab onto him to prevent her fall. Chloe was wearing a bathing suit, her big white hat and shoes, it's hard to imagine he lost sight of her and thought she fell in front of him. I don't believe he didn't know the window was open after I saw the photos, the rail looks too close to the window for someone not to know if it's opened or closed.
What I don't get is how does a passenger open or close the window. Do they go on the window side of the rail? Are passengers allowed to be on that side of the rail?

Is this the one? I had only seen part of it.

In this photo taken in the airport after the event, he looks close to his actual age. Big difference, probably because I would imagine that he wasn't eating much in the days following what happened and his face was not puffy like in other photos. If he did drink (beers or whatever) under normal circumstances, he probably was not then. He was possibly on anxiety medication at that point. The family moved to a hotel sometime in the days after this happened.

Yep, that's the photo of them, thx for posting it, I couldn't find it again. I thought the same as you regarding the other photos, he doesn't seem to know how to handle a toddler properly. I wonder if he ever had kids of his own. Anyway, I agree, he does look younger and a bit slimmer in the airport photo. If he is found guilty provided this goes to trial, 3 years is nothing compared to Chloe getting a death sentence. I've been a caregiver for children, and it's difficult enough keeping them safe without placing them in a dangerous situation.

 

[sl222]

I think I understand something more now. His family fears that he would die in prison. And that is more than possible, sorry to say.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Anello’s defense attorney, Jose Ortiz, declined to make a statement...

Grandfather charged in toddler’s fatal cruise ship fall appears in court

Thought it was a different name when saw msm video of them walking out of court. Way longer.

I've never encountered anything like this attitude the parents have. Add to that the changing stories, the jaw droppingly absurd interview, the MW's outright LIES about the case, the recent "colorblindness" revelation... I feel that this case has many many sinister layers. MOO

It keeps getting deeper and higher.

 

[al66pine]

Crim Trial re G'pa. What is Admissible & Not?
@MsBety bbm sbm in your post, pasted below. No, not saying a judge would rule any evidence suggesting that another party is at fault inadmissible.

Let's say, cruiseline sec/surv cam vid shows G'pa holding Chloe at window, when close by a random passenger moves deck chair and KAPOW, he bumps chair into G'pa, causing Chloe to fly out of his arms, thru the window? Yes, imo, that could be presented as evd. in civil or crim trial as to whether G'pa (or someone else) is liable for her death in a civil suit or guilty of NegHom. Tends to show G'pa not guility.
Or
Let's say, sec/surv cam vid shows ship at dock, both G'father & Chloe stand on Deck 11 floor; underwater volcano/tsunami erupts, causing ship to lurch violently; they are both thrown into the air. From standing w both feet on floor, Chloe is tossed 4 1/2 feet up thru open window, falls 100+ ft to her death. Yes, imo, that could be presented as evd. in civil or crim case as to whether G'pa is liable for her death in a civil suit or guilty of NegHom. Tends to show G'pa not guility.
Or
Let's say, cruiseline sec/surv cam vid shows G'pa holding Chloe dangling her (partially or totally) out the window, when he loses grip of her, causing Chloe to slip thru the window. Yes, imo, that could be presented as evd. in civil or crim case as to whether G'pa is liable for her death in a civil suit or guilty of NegHom. Tends to show G'pa is guility.
^ Just one of many factors for a judge or jury to consider. jmo.

Re: Possibly Using Settlement Agreement Doc, as Evd of Cruiseline Liability?
Not going to repeat my post #1105, so anyone can back up & read.

Inviting any verified atty's to throw in their 2 cts, to clarify or correct ^. 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.

 

[Bethan]

@jeena
It struck me from the first time seeing these pictures, of SA with Chloe, that he holds her in a most unusual & awkward manner. Looks neither safe nor comfortable for the baby.

2 likely reasons;

1) He is not accustomed to holding her, or any other young child. The photos don’t look natural snaps but posed as he beams at her, knowing a photo is being taken.

2) He is physically unable to hold her in a more natural/comfortable/safe position, due to his great bulk.

Most of us would naturally hold a child of this age, on our hip ( 80% of us on our left hip, regardless of our ‘handedness’ ) which necessitates the child having her legs in front & behind the adult’s body.

This is a safe, comfortable, natural way to hold a toddler. The adult has firm hold of the child & child is also able to grip onto the adult.

The adult’s posture adapts naturally to compensate for the change in centre of gravity & give greater stability to the duo.

This leaves one adult arm free to continue doing the laundry, shopping, hoovering, all the while carrying the toddler securely & safely.....something any one of us familiar with caring for young children innately knows/does.

We do it so naturally that we don’t even realise we are doing it.

( Goodness, I imagine we’ve all seen young girls of 8..9..10 carrying a younger sibling in this fashion, and sometimes smiled to ourselves.

Chimps & other apes do it too
Lateralisation of Infant Holding in Chimpanzees: New Data Do Not Confirm Previous Findings on JSTOR )

If SA was holding Chloe, away from his body, in the way we see in the photos above, she stood no chance of saving herself. Poor little mite.

[/QUOTE]

 

[they'll get you]

It’s this picture I find strange.
There is Chloe standing behind GF alone, almost ignored, while GF is getting all the attention, giving a lot of attention to a dog.
I saw Chloe with a wrinkled brow, she’s not happy, maybe frightened with her arms out.





Grandfather of girl who fell from cruise ship, Chloe Wiegand, speaks

 

[jeena]

@jeena
It struck me from the first time seeing these pictures, of SA with Chloe, that he holds her in a most unusual & awkward manner. Looks neither safe nor comfortable for the baby.

2 likely reasons;

1) He is not accustomed to holding her, or any other young child. The photos don’t look natural snaps but posed as he beams at her, knowing a photo is being taken.

2) He is physically unable to hold her in a more natural/comfortable/safe position, due to his great bulk.

Most of us would naturally hold a child of this age, on our hip ( 80% of us on our left hip, regardless of our ‘handedness’ ) which necessitates the child having her legs in front & behind the adult’s body.

This is a safe, comfortable, natural way to hold a toddler. The adult has firm hold of the child & child is also able to grip onto the adult.

The adult’s posture adapts naturally to compensate for the change in centre of gravity & give greater stability to the duo.

This leaves one adult arm free to continue doing the laundry, shopping, hoovering, all the while carrying the toddler securely & safely.....something any one of us familiar with caring for young children innately knows/does.

We do it so naturally that we don’t even realise we are doing it.

( Goodness, I imagine we’ve all seen young girls of 8..9..10 carrying a younger sibling in this fashion, and sometimes smiled to ourselves.

Chimps & other apes do it too
Lateralisation of Infant Holding in Chimpanzees: New Data Do Not Confirm Previous Findings on JSTOR )

If SA was holding Chloe, away from his body, in the way we see in the photos above, she stood no chance of saving herself. Poor little mite.

[/QUOTE]
Your great post made me realize I was picturing in my mind SA was holding Chloe by her waist (as he said in the interview) on his hip as he attempted to tap on the glass with his other arm. I never thought about SA holding her with one arm around her waist in front of him like we see in the photo with Chloe touching the Lucy statue. SA says he leaned forward attempting to tap on the glass, then Chloe disappeared and he thought she fell in front of him. It sounds like he was holding her in front of his
body, not on his hip.
I am wondering if the video will show them approaching the windows, and if SA looked around first and intentionally picked the only open window for a better view, making the "tapping on the glass" story total BS.

 

[oviedo]

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

I’m not a lawyer but the attorneys I work with generally put a confidentiality clause in sensitive settlement agreements and the added benefit of settling before the lawsuit is filed? No documents are ever in the court file and therefore the public NEVER sees anything IMO. However I don’t think they (parents) thought he would be charged so now there will be public information - bet that pisses their attorney off JMO

 

[Montrealaise]

I’m not a lawyer but the attorneys I work with generally put a confidentiality clause in sensitive settlement agreements and the added benefit of settling before the lawsuit is filed? No documents are ever in the court file and therefore the public NEVER sees anything IMO. However I don’t think they (parents) thought he would be charged so now there will be public information - bet that pisses their attorney off JMO

Even if the settlement documents themselves are never made public, the very fact that the cruise line agreed to settle, on whatever terms, makes it appear that the cruise line admitted some responsibility. I think the reason MW is pushing so hard for a settlement now, without having filed a lawsuit, is because he knows that he has a very weak case and would most likely lose at trial. The only way he'd win is if the jury felt very sorry for the parents and decided to make the big, rich cruise company compensate them for their loss.
However, the jury members might be horrified at SA's actions in the video - especially if they're parents themselves - and come to the conclusion that the cruise ship's safety measures were adequate and that the baby died just because someone decided to circumvent the safety measures. MW is almost certainly working on a contingency basis so if the family gets nothing, he gets nothing.

 

[Montrealaise]

The next few weeks are going to be unbelievably difficult for the family. Chloe would have celebrated her second birthday in December and of course, Christmas is just a few weeks away.

 

[Bethan]

The next few weeks are going to be unbelievably difficult for the family. Chloe would have celebrated her second birthday in December and of course, Christmas is just a few weeks away.

So true. I feel such enormous sympathy for the entire family. Can’t see how a family can recover from losing a child in such a horrific accident.

It’s truly the stuff of nightmares.

 

[Bethan]

Your great post made me realize I was picturing in my mind SA was holding Chloe by her waist (as he said in the interview) on his hip as he attempted to tap on the glass with his other arm. I never thought about SA holding her with one arm around her waist in front of him like we see in the photo with Chloe touching the Lucy statue. SA says he leaned forward attempting to tap on the glass, then Chloe disappeared and he thought she fell in front of him. It sounds like he was holding her in front of his
body, not on his hip.
I am wondering if the video will show them approaching the windows, and if SA looked around first and intentionally picked the only open window for a better view, making the "tapping on the glass" story total BS.

Yes, if he ‘presented her’ to the open window, in the same way he is ‘presenting her’ to the ‘Charlie Brown’ ice-hockey figure, she must have felt very scared when she looked ahead/down.

In this particular picture, he doesn’t even have an arm around her...it looks as if she is ‘riding’ on his forearms ( although I do note it appears that his hand is gripping firm hold of her leg ).