IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #3

[neesaki]

I meant to say in my post that Winkleman (the Wiegand’s attorney) most likely received it from Anello’s defense attorney.

I think it’s entirely possible that Winkleman himself has never seen the unedited footage.

I don’t think Winkleman has seen all of it either. He’s just a civil attorney, why would they share that with him? It could jeopardize their defense.
And of course the defense attorney says what he says. Because that’s what he’s supposed to say.

 

[Chikkamma]

Can't wait til they read that aloud in the courtroom. GAME OVER.

I was reading up on cruise ship case law today. Apparently, just because a certain act is prohibited by a ship’s Guest Conduct Policy doesn’t mean the ship is off the hook if something bad happens because a guest breaches that policy. The idea is that a person cannot legally consent to another party’s negligence.

Cruise ship litigation

“46 U.S.C.A. §183c expressly invalidates any contract provision purporting to limit a ship’s liability for negligence to its passengers. It shall be unlawful for the manager, agent, master, or owner of any vessel transporting passengers between ports of the United States or between any such port and a foreign port to insert in any rule, regulation, contract, or agreement any provision or limitation (1) purporting, in the event of loss of life or bodily injury arising from the negligence or fault of such owner or his servants, to relieve such owner, master, or agent from liability.31”

For example: Let’s say a cruise ship’s Guest Contract explicitly prohibits guests from running on the ship due to the risk of falling. If a guest breaches the policy by running, slips on the floor and breaks her leg, the ship could still be held liable if it can be proven that the floors were just too damn slippery (i.e. negligently so).

 

[Chikkamma]

...

 

[scruffydog]

Do any Disney ships have windows that open? Since RC is the target, I would think that either the Family or RC's Defense Lawyers would want to make mention of comparisons with other cruise lines. If windows that can be open or closed are universal, or at least common across most ships other than those run by RC, it seems to me that would be quite a significant argument against RC having to pay a cent. Otherwise the Wiegand's might as well be indicting the entire cruise industry with their stupidity.

I have to ask... they’ve been on several cruises? Didn’t I hear they have a Go Fund Me Account?????????

 

[SouthAussie]

I was reading up on cruise ship case law today. Apparently, just because a certain act is prohibited by a ship’s Guest Conduct Policy doesn’t mean the ship is off the hook if something bad happens because a guest breaches that policy. The idea is that a person cannot legally consent to another party’s negligence.

Cruise ship litigation

“46 U.S.C.A. §183c expressly invalidates any contract provision purporting to limit a ship’s liability for negligence to its passengers. It shall be unlawful for the manager, agent, master, or owner of any vessel transporting passengers between ports of the United States or between any such port and a foreign port to insert in any rule, regulation, contract, or agreement any provision or limitation (1) purporting, in the event of loss of life or bodily injury arising from the negligence or fault of such owner or his servants, to relieve such owner, master, or agent from liability.31”

For example: Let’s say a cruise ship’s Guest Contract explicitly prohibits guests from running on the ship due to the risk of falling. If a guest breaches the policy by running, slips on the floor and breaks her leg, the ship could still be held liable if it can be proven that the floors were just too damn slippery (i.e. negligently so).

Which is why their lawyer is harping on and on about how it is negligent to have a window that opens without a sticker on the window (wouldn't the sticker have not been in front of SA when a window is open? Now we are counting on SA to look for stickers?)

When, in fact, the cruise liner placed a barrier rail between the passengers and the windows, a barrier rail of sufficient height to deter a toddler from climbing it - as well as following up with the relevantly worded guest policy and warning, and a ticket contract.

It will make for an interesting court case, considering that your linked article also says ....

As one judge stated, the lesson to be learned from over a hundred years of non-evolving case law and confusion regarding limitations on rights and remedies, is essentially the following: “Don’t have an accident, don’t get sick, and hope for an uneventful cruise vacation, otherwise you will discover that your rights and remedies as an aggrieved consumer are governed by antiquated legal principles which favor cruise lines to the detriment of cruise passengers.”

Cruise ship litigation
(the article having been written by an attorney)

 

[IceIce9]

I have to ask... they’ve been on several cruises? Didn’t I hear they have a Go Fund Me Account?????????

More than one account

 

[Seattle1]

link included in your article plainly states not to put a child on the railing. It's common sense really. Could You Fall Overboard During Your Cruise?

Yes, that's exactly what I said: child safety (keeping a child-safe) does not include resting children on the guardrail. It's just common sense.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

I believe the video will show him bending way over as well (due to the laws of physics and all the reasons previously mentioned on this thread). So my question is what video were the journalist shown exactly?

We already know that Winkleman showed a doctored/altered video to the CVS This Morning journalist, David Begnaud (at 0:40s-

). Winkelman alleges the video was the “same format he received from prosecutors”. However, t is more likely he received it from SA’s criminal attorney (since Winkleman does not even represent Anello, and the Wiegands had not yet filed their civil suit at the time of this interview).

That being said, this ALTERED video appears to be the only one that the media has ever seen... and it was shown to them by Winkleman (not the prosecution, not Anello’s criminal attorney). The flow of the video goes... Winkleman—>Journalists.

1. Could Winkleman have cut parts of the video to make it more favorable to SA before showing it to media or or is it possible that he, himself, has never seen the entire unedited, real-time footage?

2. How did Begnaud and CBS This Morning come to learn that the video had been altered? It wasn’t Winkleman who told them.

David Begnaud was SO pro SA in the first days after the tragedy. Apparently, he’s beginning to get it. And you may have caught him putting words into SA’s mouth about how he was holding Chloe, then knocking on nothing, reaching down...DB had to demonstrate to SA how SA was bear hugging her then knocking on the missing window.
When DB asked how he felt as she was falling, SA gave the impression of how horrid it was watching her fall. Hmm. I thought he said he first looked for her on the floor? Well, SA, which is it? Did you watch her fall? Or did you miss it bc you were looking down on the floor for her?
I’m with posters who don’t believe anything the guy is saying.
It’s still a huge gamble for RCCL to take it to trial. Bc the money stakes are so high. However, the criminal case outcome will have a lot to do with their legal posturing. I hope SA gets the maximum sentence allowed under PR law. With no chance for early release. For those posters who think he’ll have to think about this the rest of his life, I say good. And he can think about it for the next three years while he sits in jail. Wonder how fellow inmates will view this guy? Jailhouse justice. It’s secret, it’s swift and it’s certain.

IMHO personal injury cases like this have little to no merit. And have caused the backlash in public sentiment against personal injury lawyers and lawsuits. There are so many meritorious cases that never find their way into the legal system. People just choose to move on despite the validity of their claims against the wrongdoers. There does not seem to be any middle ground. Maybe it’s distrust of all things legal? Or the truthfulness of the parties? I can think of a few more reasons, but this is not the forum to discuss those thoughts.

“First, let’s kill all the lawyers.”
More Shakespeare.

Edited to add: At the very end of the video, DA remarks no matter what the outcome, he’ll have to get some help. He didn’t say why. Guess he knows there is a good chance he’ll be in jail. But he’ll get help? If it’s grief counseling, what’s he waiting for? The sooner the better. If it’s substance abuse, or habitual disregard of the law, or a propensity to embellish/change the story of what actually transpired, i.e. lying, again, why wait?
It would help him during the sentencing phase. But I guess no one has told him to act like he’s sorry about Chloe, or anything else contributing to his reckless behavior on board the ship.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

More than one account

BBM and color
Just let that sink in...

 

[Midwestmom2019]

More than one account

How many is more than one? SA defense. Hockey in Europe. Wonder if any accounts set up under fake names? How could that be checked?

 

[neesaki]

Did anyone notice in that last interview, SA didn’t say much, but he did say something like “I’m sorry we have to be here”.. while looking down with a look of, possibly shame? on his face.
It just made me wonder if deep down he wants to give in and own up to being the one responsible, but just can’t quite get there. Did anyone else get that out of it?

Either way, he knows full well that he’s the one responsible, the only one. I really think he knows that.... but is trying real hard to convince himself, and the public, otherwise. This blaming RC is all a lie.

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

Did anyone notice in that last interview, SA didn’t say much, but he did say something like “I’m sorry we have to be here”.. while looking down with a look of, possibly shame? on his face.
It just made me wonder if deep down he wants to give in and own up to being the one responsible, but just can’t quite get there. Did anyone else get that out of it?

Either way, he knows full well that he’s the one responsible, the only one. I really think he knows that.... but is trying real hard to convince himself, and the public, otherwise. This blaming RC is all a lie.

ITA he looks like he knows he is facing impending doom. SA knows what really happened but he can’t fess up now because this has gone too far. When the video is played at the trial it will be quite telling for the parents IMO. Can’t believe they would file the lawsuit but not view the tapes first. It makes no sense. But holding Chloe up to that open window 11 floors high made no sense.....none of this makes any sense. JMO

 

[Montrealaise]

ITA he looks like he knows he is facing impending doom. SA knows what really happened but he can’t fess up now because this has gone too far. When the video is played at the trial it will be quite telling for the parents IMO. Can’t believe they would file the lawsuit but not view the tapes first. It makes no sense. But holding Chloe up to that open window 11 floors high made no sense.....none of this makes any sense. JMO

I'm sure that RCCL will play the entire, uncut video as part of their defense at the civil trial, just as the PR prosecutors will play it at SA's criminal trial. Although the parents have so far refused to view the video, sooner or later they will have to face what it really shows. If they have been blindly believing SA's version of events - well, let's just say that I wouldn't want to be in their shoes, or in his, when the truth finally comes out.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Did anyone notice in that last interview, SA didn’t say much, but he did say something like “I’m sorry we have to be here”.. while looking down with a look of, possibly shame? on his face.
It just made me wonder if deep down he wants to give in and own up to being the one responsible, but just can’t quite get there. Did anyone else get that out of it?

Either way, he knows full well that he’s the one responsible, the only one. I really think he knows that.... but is trying real hard to convince himself, and the public, otherwise. This blaming RC is all a lie.

He can’t ‘fess up bc that will destroy the family’s case against RCCL.

On a second note, the only one I see really affected is dad. Video interview showed him choke up. Think with David Begnaud on msm.
Everyone else is bad acting or silent.

 

[drama_farmer]

I know we're all impatient to finally see the video, so it will be clear what exactly happened, but I had to remind myself today that what "exactly" happens is subjective. We only have to look at a myriad of other cases with video (from poor quality to cinematic) to remind us that people see things differently.

There's still furious debate about the JFK assassination, there's pages and pages and pages of debate about whether a particular guy on a bridge is actually wearing a hat or if his hair is just like Biebers. . . there's a person dressed in SWAT costume walking the halls of a church and many can't tell if that person is male or female. . .

So, as much as I anticipate learning a lot more about exactly happened on that 11th floor deck, I'm also bracing myself for the very real possibility that the video may not provide all of the answers we seek. IMO

 

[scruffydog]

I know we're all impatient to finally see the video, so it will be clear what exactly happened, but I had to remind myself today that what "exactly" happens is subjective. We only have to look at a myriad of other cases with video (from poor quality to cinematic) to remind us that people see things differently.

There's still furious debate about the JFK assassination, there's pages and pages and pages of debate about whether a particular guy on a bridge is actually wearing a hat or if his hair is just like Biebers. . . there's a person dressed in SWAT costume walking the halls of a church and many can't tell if that person is male or female. . .

So, as much as I anticipate learning a lot more about exactly happened on that 11th floor deck, I'm also bracing myself for the very real possibility that the video may not provide all of the answers we seek. IMO

I do not believe that we , the “public”, will ever see any portion of the sickening video.

 

[they'll get you]

All the windows in voyager of the seas still open so that tells me RCCL remains confident.

Voyager has been through a refurbishment and I’ve noticed the chairs sit closer together creating a bit more of a barrier, it’s harder to get closer to the windows but still accessible.

I’m only using my phone and unfortunately many of the pics are too large to download. Sorry if some are sideways. More to come.

 

[they'll get you]

While I was measuring the lifeguard cane past and opened the windows.

Sorry for it being sideways.

Also I’ve noticed this time that the windows that open are surrounded in a blue painted border. The windows are dirty from salt spray and IMO it’s very obvious there’s glass there.

 

[they'll get you]

The little grated window had no glass in Voyager, I asked what it was and was told it was for maintenance and access for window washing.
Impossible to fall through.

Sorry my pics won’t download. I’ll keeo trying-more to come.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

All the windows in voyager of the seas still open so that tells me RCCL remains confident.

Voyager has been through a refurbishment and I’ve noticed the chairs sit closer together creating a bit more of a barrier, it’s harder to get closer to the windows but still accessible.
View attachment 220655
I’m only using my phone and unfortunately many of the pics are too large to download. Sorry if some are sideways. More to come.

These are all GREAT!!!! Tytyty