IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #6

[SaguaroSpirit]

This comment was what convinced me that the family members had never been on a cruise previously. If they had, they would have known about the open configuration of upper decks of the ship that have windows that open for ventilation.

IIRC hadn't the family been on Disney cruises prior?

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

Was an autopsy done?

Yes.

New details emerge in Baby Chloe’s cruise ship death


Elmer L. Román González, secretary of the Department of Public Safety in San Juan, told CNN that the autopsy was completed Monday and on Tuesday morning “the body was delivered to the funeral home chosen by the family.”

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

All SA's lawyers can do is muddy the waters, add confusion and hope to sway one juror (or the judge) of reasonable doubt.

 

[katydid23]

Bizarre.... It’s as though they thought they were in a shopping mall instead of on a Cruise ship. What about all the open decks with nothing but railing between them and the ocean? The only reason this deck 11 had windows is... I believe.... because it provided a covered area for shade and the bar. Without windows it would become somewhat of a steamy sauna type environment wouldn’t it. My, wouldn’t that be pleasant?

That's what they want and what the lawsuit is about.

They want all windows on all ships nailed shut, and 25 million bucks along with it.

 

[IceIce9]

That's what they want and what the lawsuit is about.

They want all windows on all ships nailed shut, and 25 million bucks along with it.

Even if all windows on all cruise ships were nailed shut (as IF it would ever happen) what about open decks on cruise ships? And balconies?

Wouldn’t ships still be a hazard if idiots were entrusted to be caregivers of young children? They could dangle toddlers over the rails of a balcony or open deck.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Even if all windows on all cruise ships were nailed shut (as IF it would ever happen) what about open decks on cruise ships? And balconies?

Wouldn’t ships still be a hazard if idiots were entrusted to be caregivers of young children? They could dangle toddlers over the rails of a balcony or open deck.

It's not like that ever happened before, either.

 

[MsMarple]

Notice how KW is careful in interviews never to cast any blame on SA, even right after it happened? She says when learning of the tragedy; where's my baby...SA was banging on the window saying he thought there was glass... someone from RCCL tried to stop me, etc.
Shouldn't KW have questioned or yelled at SA from the get go, the person entrusted with CW's care, to find out what happened?
KW never admits faulting SA of anything, she keeps all the focus (guilt) on RCCL.

You mean like screaming "What happened?" or maybe even "What the F happened SA?" to SA? Yeah, I noticed that. Nope, no blame, no questioning, just absolute acceptance that SA thought there was glass...

 

[mickey2942]

All SA's lawyers can do is muddy the waters, add confusion and hope to sway one juror (or the judge) of reasonable doubt.

Unfortunately, for SA, due to the absolute veracity of the video evidence, from different angles, not even a blind person would have "reasonable doubt", because everyone would tell that juror exactly what was happening on the video.

 

[lonetraveler]

Even if all windows on all cruise ships were nailed shut (as IF it would ever happen) what about open decks on cruise ships? And balconies?

Wouldn’t ships still be a hazard if idiots were entrusted to be caregivers of young children? They could dangle toddlers over the rails of a balcony or open deck.

I know right? Maybe they should have booked a cruise on a submarine.

 

[lonetraveler]

I'm still very interested in if the parents had an inside cabin or a balcony cabin.

 

[they'll get you]

I think the window should get life without parole.

Any adult can climb any railing on a ship if they put their mind to it. Some fools are filmed climbing from balcony to another.
An 18 month old child would NOT be able to unless it was helped by an adult. imo.
Research shows me the only child who had fallen overboard was from a mother’s murder suicide.

 

[they'll get you]

Yes, after a good beating.

That sounds panefull.

 

[they'll get you]

That's what they want and what the lawsuit is about.

They want all windows on all ships nailed shut, and 25 million bucks along with it.

Chloe would’ve been up to this guys knees. How can a baby climb out of this window unaided?

 

[they'll get you]

Even if all windows on all cruise ships were nailed shut (as IF it would ever happen) what about open decks on cruise ships? And balconies?

Wouldn’t ships still be a hazard if idiots were entrusted to be caregivers of young children? They could dangle toddlers over the rails of a balcony or open deck.

Sir Richard Branson has his reasons for making his first cruise ship, Virgin Voyages' Scarlet Lady, an adults-only experience.

"I love my grandkids, but just occasionally I wouldn't mind going off on a cruise and partying and having some fun away from them," he said.
Richard Branson reveals why his cruise ships will be adults only
Maybe that’s not really the reason Richard.

 

[they'll get you]

Unfortunately, for SA, due to the absolute veracity of the video evidence, from different angles, not even a blind person would have "reasonable doubt", because everyone would tell that juror exactly what was happening on the video.

A blind person would not be able to stumble out of those windows, or overboard for that matter.

 

[they'll get you]

I know right? Maybe they should have booked a cruise on a submarine.

No wait! SA would’ve opened the hatch!

 

[neesaki]

Yes.

New details emerge in Baby Chloe’s cruise ship death


Elmer L. Román González, secretary of the Department of Public Safety in San Juan, told CNN that the autopsy was completed Monday and on Tuesday morning “the body was delivered to the funeral home chosen by the family.”

Thanks, Lawnguylander. I was actually questioning if they had done an autopsy on Chloe. In all honesty, I have had questions if perhaps she could have been a victim of sexual abuse. Yes, Unfortunately this comes up more than we want to know, therefore comes with the territory following these cases on WS.

Thank you very much. Now the hope is that they did a thorough autopsy.

 

[al66pine]

Using SA's (Hypothetical) Crim Trial Testimony at Civil Trial?

I am going to go out on a limb and say there's No chance he takes the stand in the trial. I assume that if he did, that testimony could be cited by RCCL in the civil suit, is that correct?

@SoCalDavidS Use at civil trial? In a word, yes.
In many more words, below, but different from post 376. For a faster read, scroll down to
In case in chief, Winkleman puts on evd. to try to show 'window defects' in Frdm/Seas design, construction, installation, etc. and violations of various ship-building codes, standards, guidelines and recommendations thru expert witness(es) re marine architecture & related fields.
RCCL atty's cross exam of those experts will try to show that some/all of ^ stds, etc do not apply to Frdm/Seas.
Winkleman will try to show that RCCL's failure to comply w those stds, etc. was negligent.
And that RCCL's negligence re windows caused Chloe's death.
One pivotal, crucial claim is (in paragraphs 16 thru 20) in effect SA "thought there was glass" in window frame and/or did not see glass was 'missing' from window frame thru which Chloe was held (and dropped). To try to show what SA saw or thought he saw/did not see, he's got to testify in civil case. And <--that subjects him to RCCL's cross exam about all his other inconsistent and/or directly contradictory stmts.

In def.'s case, RCCL will try to show that SA's actions were the intervening cause of Chloe's death and can do this is three or more ways:
1. Show vids from various angles, The vids we've seen w SA's head past the window - as many here believe - make good defense for RCCL as not being responsible for Chloe's death.
2. Put on shipboard witnesses such as passengers & staff, about what they saw SA do & what they heard him say on Deck 11 and from other "outside witnesses" for ex, LEOs & any EMTs who communicated w him after he dropped her, and any witnesses on the dock who saw her being held in mid-air, et al.
3. Recall SA to the witness stand, the man holding Chloe at window. And then RCCL can ask him
about his actions, can challenge him w vid clips. Can ask about his other out-of-courtstmts: several inconsistent or directly contradicting his own TTWG testimony, other 'reasons' / 'excuses' given at various times - colorblindness, etc.
For ea 'reason' /'excuse' stmt he made pre-trial, SA must either -
- deny making the stmt, i.e., essentially saying the person testifying about SA's earlier stmt is not telling the truth or misheard SA, then ditto for other stmt about another 'reason,' so one -by-one, essentially calling several witnesses liars, or
- admit making the stmt, so as Prosecutor asks about three, four, or five of these stmts, SA is essentially admitting that he's come up w a string of excuses (most or all of which sound pretty flimsy).
^^^Sorry for repeating some info from my post 376, but different parties, different angles.^^^
BEST OF ALL FOR RCCL
if SA has testified at crim trial, RCCL can ask him about his sworn stmts made on the stand in crim trial. RCCL can use court reporter's transcript or possibly audio-video of him on the stand. <--- This is an exclusion* from the hearsay rule. This allows RCCL to use the prior contradictory testimony to impeach him, that is, to question his credibility. Typically using his own prior sworn testimony to impeach is waaaay more damaging to his credibility, than some other witness(es) testifying about his inconsistent or contradictory stmts.

If SA's principal overriding interest in the two cases is supporting his step-dau & son-in-law in their lawsuit against RCCL, seems exercising his right not to testify in crim trial would be beneficial to them.
imo.
-----------------------------------------------------
* Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 801

 

[neesaki]

Even if all windows on all cruise ships were nailed shut (as IF it would ever happen) what about open decks on cruise ships? And balconies?

Wouldn’t ships still be a hazard if idiots were entrusted to be caregivers of young children? They could dangle toddlers over the rails of a balcony or open deck.

Exactly... I’m thinking forward... cruise ships no longer allow children under the age of , what... twelve?
Well in actuality, there are a lot of things that can go wrong. And unlike on land, you can’t exactly get away from it. If things go wrong, you’re stuck there!
Just a thought from a slightly neurotic claustrophobic. Otherwise, just ignore me.

 

[neesaki]

Even if all windows on all cruise ships were nailed shut (as IF it would ever happen) what about open decks on cruise ships? And balconies?

Wouldn’t ships still be a hazard if idiots were entrusted to be caregivers of young children? They could dangle toddlers over the rails of a balcony or open deck.

Not to mention, every place on earth would be a hazard for children if left in the care of negligent caregivers. Seriously, the world is dangerous enough for our children without this kind of thing.