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

[fabvab]

No offense to posters here, but why are we still discussing the colorblind excuse? It won’t matter if his alleged colorblindness is “proved” or “disproved” in court because this condition does not cause people see glass when there is none. If he incorrectly assumed there was glass present (which I don’t personally believe) colorblindness is no way to blame. It is a completely baseless argument.

I agree about the colorblindness not playing a role in this tragedy. I think we keep discussing things over and over because there have been no new developments since the videos came out.

I have tried to make sense out of SA's actions and cannot come up with any logical excuse for him to place Chloe in such a dangerous situation. To me, a rational adult would have held Chloe while standing behind the wooden rail. I also think a conscientious adult would have also been holding her hand while she was walking through the crowd of adult.

 

[Forever Young]

Kind of curious about the misdemeanor charge. Most of the ones listed here involve DUI.

Indiana Misdemeanor Crimes by Class and Sentences

Class A Misdemeanors
A class A misdemeanor is the most serious type of misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $5,000. For example, possession of up to 30 grams of marijuana is a Class A misdemeanor. (Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-3-2 (2019).)

Class B Misdemeanors
Class B misdemeanors are punishable by up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $1,000. Public intoxication is an example of a Class B misdemeanor. (Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-3-3 (2019).)

Class C Misdemeanors
A Class C misdemeanor is punishable by up to 60 days in jail and a fine of up to $500. Driving under the influence (DUI) is a Class C misdemeanor if it is the person’s first DUI offense and the person’s blood alcohol content (BAC) is over .08 but less than .15. (Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-3-4 (2019).)

 

[Forever Young]

From another another website:

The crime could be in form of one of the following: assaults forgery of certificates, prostitution, reckless driving, and some others.

• Infractions - referring to less serious cases like having a fake ID card and loitering
• Misdemeanors - such as Drunk Driving, assaults, disorderly conducts, gambling etc.
• Felonies - such as violent crimes capable of causing injuries. They include: rape, murder, driving while intoxicated (DWI), Manslaughter and so on.

Indiana Misdemeanor | Misdemeanor Charges In Indiana | GovernmentRegistry.org

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

The misdemeanor charge brings to mind KW saying something to the effect that she didn't believe SA should be charged in this "misdemeanor" offense. She mentions "misdemeanor" twice. Really minimizes what happened there. JMO, I found that to be in poor taste.[/QUOTE]

Yes, especially when she is speaking to the death of her own child. Talk about minimization! Is that sentence telling or what. Thanks for pointing that out, I hadn’t caught that. SMH.

 

[MimosaMornings]

JMO
My idea of a “dream cruise” would not be to take a ten year old and a one year old. That’s just me. I might not be able to fully relax with one so young with us. And all together in one cabin with both children. Perhaps they had booked a larger exterior cabin.
The entire incident is horrifying to me.

 

[fabvab]

I

I’ll have to watch both videos again. The video from the side looks like henflings her out the window. The one from behind was hard for me to see. Either way, even if the was just setting her on the ledge it was fast and furious.

My husband and I had not discussed this case at all other than asking if the other had heard about it, and he had not seen any interviews. Hubby was watching the news one evening and a story about the lawsuit aired on TV. I told him I had been reading/discussing on a forum and sent him the link to the Comay video. Hubby watched the video a couple of times and his first words were, "He threw that baby out the window!" He was upset and repeated that in a loud voice several times. That was his unbiased reaction because he had not heard all the different spins being put out there other than SA didn't know there wasn't any glass.
My reaction to the video (after being on this forum daily) was that SA put her partially outside the window and then lost his grip. Not sure now if my reaction was tainted by what I want to reason/think happened or by all the stories that Winkle, SA, etc. keep putting out there. For the sake of me, I cannot fathom why SA put Chloe in that situation in the first place!

 

[SaucyWalker]

I haven't posted much on this forum (too preoccupied with the Paighton Houston case), but I just recently took another look at little Chloe's obituary. The parents of CW are grieving and I don't think there's anyone who would say they don't feel compassion for them. I do marvel, though, at how, in the face of such a tragedy, they are able to think so strategically, to the point of even including the following information in Chloe's obituary (the paragraph below was extracted by me from Legacy.com; the bolding was done by me):

She loved chasing bubbles, splash pads, and slides. Every person who encountered her said that Chloe was the smartest and happiest baby they had ever seen. And she genuinely was.
​

I can't say I've ever heard of including "splash pads" in a toddler's short list of "likes," particularly for inclusion in her obituary. Maybe I'm nitpicking with this one, but I just had to put it out there as it struck me as as a subtle, but quite calculated and, IMO, unnecessary bit of information.

Didn't the H2O Zone which Wink referred to as a "child's play area" have a splash pad there as one of the main attractions?

 

[MsMarple]

Yes, she had to go OVER the railing, which is why he lifted her so high. But then (when viewed from the back) he then lifts her up onto the railing.

At this point in the video, you can see how much taller Sam is compared to Chloe at his right side. He shifts her to his left side, and still appears to be holding her while she sits on the railing.

IMO, he would not have been able to stoop over the railing far enough to hold her on the window ledge. The ledge is considerably lower than the railing.

Again, this is from the back.

The side view really does not allow us to see much of the railing because of the support brackets under the railing and the support beams that reach floor to ceiling. But you can just make out the railing, behind the support beams.

These brackets blend with the window frames, giving the illusion that the frames stick out farther than they really do. Someone else previously pointed that out, and was pretty much ignored. That is not the window frames, it is support brackets beneath the railing, and support beams that reach to the ceiling that we are seeing in the side view.

It has been my belief for a while that his arms and head were not able to reach past the window frame to the outside.

The same for Chloe. I could be wrong, but it appears to me that she also was not past the outer window frame, until she fell after being pitched forward by SA's rocking motion, as seen from behind.

His explanation, in the DB interview, is that he is trying to reach farther to tap the glass. He bends forward at the waist, Chloe also bends at the waist while seated on the railing.

I only see SA's forearms resting on the railing, hanging past the railing, and do not see him holding her straight out. MOO

I was not able to see what others saw in terms of SA holding/tossing Chloe out the window. It doesn't mean they're wrong of course, just that I wasn't able to see SA holding Chloe outside over the concrete.

Here's the thing: SA probably wasn't aware of all the CTTV cameras the ship has but IMO Winkleman surely is. So there are several possibilities at play here (IMO); that none of the videos clearly show just how far out SA's head was and how far out he held Chloe or; it's obvious SA held her outside of the window and Winkleman is ignoring it or; SA didn't actually hold Chloe completely outside the window.

I have no idea of the truth and after watching the video numerous times I can't see her exact position other than what appears to be her on the railing.

I know most posters here have seen more than I can discern and I know that they could be right in their conclusions. It's just that I can't see it clearly. It just seems to me that if there's clear video showing SA holding Chloe out the window or tossing her out to the concrete then the DA would have lodged a charge of manslaughter rather than negligent homicide.

And I am keeping in mind that the DA has claimed they have strong evidence of negligent homicide and they may have simply decided to go with a more provable case. We've not heard more about the alleged plea bargain so right now we don't know if it ever went further than talking and into a formal offer. All MOO so please don't throw tomatoes at me because of my poor vision.

 

[Pammi]

RCCL has a guest conduct code. They address this issue in unsafe behavior... is in the paperwork that comes online when you check in before your cruise.

 

[neesaki]

Royal Caribbean allows you to bring two bottles of wine onboard with you per stateroom. I won’t go into the further tricks people get up to.

Haha... as well, I’m quite sure it would be rather easy to smuggle in a flask or two. Or, Do they examine their luggage, bit by bit?

 

[neesaki]

SA must have thought CCTV did not capture his actions . No way did he think the clear evidence of his movements were recorded for all to see .
To save his own skin he frantically lied to LE , his family and anyone who in fact would listen .
Hopefully now the investigation can move towards some justice for the innocent wee girl

I totally agree, IMO, you got it right! And thank you very much for your thoughtful post, Fidobell.

 

[they'll get you]

My husband and I had not discussed this case at all other than asking if the other had heard about it, and he had not seen any interviews. Hubby was watching the news one evening and a story about the lawsuit aired on TV. I told him I had been reading/discussing on a forum and sent him the link to the Comay video. Hubby watched the video a couple of times and his first words were, "He threw that baby out the window!" He was upset and repeated that in a loud voice several times. That was his unbiased reaction because he had not heard all the different spins being put out there other than SA didn't know there wasn't any glass.
My reaction to the video (after being on this forum daily) was that SA put her partially outside the window and then lost his grip. Not sure now if my reaction was tainted by what I want to reason/think happened or by all the stories that Winkle, SA, etc. keep putting out there. For the sake of me, I cannot fathom why SA put Chloe in that situation in the first place!

Same here fabvab, hubby and I know RC ships and those windows well and when I was telling him he paused and said ‘it sounds like it was deliberate, he murdered her’.

 

[1&2&3]

In this discussion of whether we have heard from other family members on board, IMO it is natural that they have not spoken out.

The person charged in Chloe’s death is her grandfather, and even though he is a step grandfather, SA has been in the family for many years. It would be extremely rude for the other family members on the cruise to go public, speaking about him. Also, these grandparents are grieving too as they see what their own children are going through. We know our children grow up, become adults, but to the majority of us, they are still our children, our babies.

Apparently the whole group got along or else why would they go together on a cruise?

JMO, if there is anything the other grandparents have to say, it will be one of those things they take to the grave with them. As we have heard, no family member was present to witness this tragedy. I don’t believe SA’s actions before his taking over the care of Chloe will ever be known - unless there are printed records.

My opinions only.

 

[SouthAussie]

Same here fabvab, hubby and I know RC ships and those windows well and when I was telling him he paused and said ‘it sounds like it was deliberate, he murdered her’.

I kinda wish they had a charge of culpable homicide - as opposed to negligent homicide.

Negligent means that he didn't take due care.

Culpable means that he knows he was doing something wrong (lifting Chloe onto and past the safety rail).

This misdemeanor thing - for killing an innocent 18 month old child - really gets my goat.

 

[neesaki]

DBM

 

[they'll get you]

RCCL has a guest conduct code. They address this issue in unsafe behavior... is in the paperwork that comes online when you check in before your cruise.

I’ve been on several RCCs & have never read it.

 

[Sapphire1719]

Same here fabvab, hubby and I know RC ships and those windows well and when I was telling him he paused and said ‘it sounds like it was deliberate, he murdered her’.

Do people REALLY think he murdered her?? I’m not ruling anything out, and I understand the video was shocking to see, with his callous disregard to her safety. It’s horrifying for sure! Maybe I’m naive in thinking that nobody with a shred of human decency could deliberately deliver an innocent baby to a horrific death like that...I’m just curious for those who think it was deliberate, what could possibly be the motive? And WHY are her parents backing it up, if so? I’m so confused ‍

 

[they'll get you]

I kinda wish they had a charge of culpable homicide - as opposed to negligent homicide.

Negligent means that he didn't take due care.

Culpable means that he knows he was doing something wrong (lifting Chloe onto and past the safety rail).

This misdemeanor thing - for killing an innocent 18 month old child - really gets my goat.

I was in a shopping centre and I saw a young mother sit her little baby on the black handrail of the escalator as she was going up. It was only for a moment and her arm was around baby but I’d taken some steps toward her to warn her of the danger.
I instantly thought of Chloe, I was seeing Chloe right there in my mind.
What if that baby fell? I guess stupidity walks amount us every day.

 

[sl222]

I haven't posted much on this forum (too preoccupied with the Paighton Houston case), but I just recently took another look at little Chloe's obituary. The parents of CW are grieving and I don't think there's anyone who would say they don't feel compassion for them. I do marvel, though, at how, in the face of such a tragedy, they are able to think so strategically, to the point of even including the following information in Chloe's obituary (the paragraph below was extracted by me from Legacy.com; the bolding was done by me):

She loved chasing bubbles, splash pads, and slides. Every person who encountered her said that Chloe was the smartest and happiest baby they had ever seen. And she genuinely was.
​

I can't say I've ever heard of including "splash pads" in a toddler's short list of "likes," particularly for inclusion in her obituary. Maybe I'm nitpicking with this one, but I just had to put it out there as it struck me as as a subtle, but quite calculated and, IMO, unnecessary bit of information.

Didn't the H2O Zone which Wink referred to as a "child's play area" have a splash pad there as one of the main attractions?

Interesting point. Funny you mention this because I reread the obituary today and that jumped out at me too. But I really don't know what a splash pad is. Can someone enlighten me, please?

 

[SouthAussie]

RCCL has a guest conduct code. They address this issue in unsafe behavior... is in the paperwork that comes online when you check in before your cruise.

As Royal Caribbean have bound their guest conduct policy into their ticket contract, I believe that the liability will be on him for not reading his contract and adhering to it.
I would bet that in the emailed correspondence it is said to 'please read the attached documents carefully' or words to that effect.

I kept waiting for Winkleman to mention the guest conduct policy - but, of course, he never did. An incomplete picture has definitely been sold to the general public.