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

[WiseGuy]

How many seconds was CW by the window and out the window? If she was by the window for 19 seconds and out the window for a five seconds, SA could still use the defense he thought glass was there and leaned forward so CW could bang on it, but she was gone in a few seconds. Personal injury attorneys usually don't take cases they can't win, so there must be something tangible their case is hinging on.

But does what he "thought" matter at all? In a negligent homicide case, doesn't the prosecution need to establish what a "reasonably prudent person" would do/think? SA had no REASONABLE basis for his "thinking" - no reasonable person would think/assume that a clear open space must have glass and that there's no need to bother to check for the glass before lifting the baby and risking her life? Same with the colorblind excuse.
I imagine in a trial, SA could claim he's colorblind and assumed there was glass in front of his face. RCL would reply, that's fine Mr Anello, we believe everything you've said. None of that, even if true, matters at all. Because your actions while supervising Chloe fail to come close to meeting the standard of what a reasonably prudent person would do.

So my question is, to what extent does the "reasonably prudent person" standard nullify all of Anello's excuses?

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I sure the hell hope not. SA needs to go to trial, especially if he is going to continue to insist that he didn't know the window was open because he's colorblind, that in his opinion he no longer blames himself for Chloe's death, that he believes RCCL is solely at fault, that RCCL just needs to "Just fix it. Just fix the boat."

Own it, dude, just own it.

It truly amazes me that SA wants to "clear his name" He initially blamed himself until MW told him that it was the fault of the ship. Then, someone suggested to SA that it was his colorblindness that caused him to not see the window. Like you said, Ms.Marple, SA needs to accept full responsibility for Chloe's death.

 

[jeena]

You make some good points. My understanding is that Winkleman, as his clients' representative, is supposed to depend upon their statements as fact. However, if he later learns that his clients have misrepresented the facts or if they were honestly mistaken then he is bound to correct any mistakes. By signing the complaint he is verifying that the information in the complaint is true as far as he is able to verify such. If the court finds that he did not correct mistakes that he was made aware of then he is liable for sanction by the court.

But that doesn't mean he must accept RCCL's dispute of the facts. RCCL is basically claiming the facts are different from what was stated in the complaint. So yes RCCL must also present what they believe are the facts and if they are misrepresenting then the same holds for them.

I'm kind of surprised there isn't additional video that clearly shows what happened. I know ships have outside CTTV cameras to monitor man overboard instances. Are they active when in port? It seems not. So without further video from that or from the dock then what we currently know appears to be the total of videos that captured Chloe's fall. Currently we don't know what higher resolution video shows, only what RCCL claims.

But in the end, as you said it's clear SA was negligent. So the video may not play as important a role as we here feel it does. RCCL is in essence saying there is no standing to the Wiegand's claims and I agree.

You make some good points. My understanding is that Winkleman, as his clients' representative, is supposed to depend upon their statements as fact. However, if he later learns that his clients have misrepresented the facts or if they were honestly mistaken then he is bound to correct any mistakes. By signing the complaint he is verifying that the information in the complaint is true as far as he is able to verify such. If the court finds that he did not correct mistakes that he was made aware of then he is liable for sanction by the court.

But that doesn't mean he must accept RCCL's dispute of the facts. RCCL is basically claiming the facts are different from what was stated in the complaint. So yes RCCL must also present what they believe are the facts and if they are misrepresenting then the same holds for them.

I'm kind of surprised there isn't additional video that clearly shows what happened. I know ships have outside CTTV cameras to monitor man overboard instances. Are they active when in port? It seems not. So without further video from that or from the dock then what we currently know appears to be the total of videos that captured Chloe's fall. Currently we don't know what higher resolution video shows, only what RCCL claims.

But in the end, as you said it's clear SA was negligent. So the video may not play as important a role as we here feel it does. RCCL is in essence saying there is no standing to the Wiegand's claims and I agree.

I read in the case files kindred posted that RCCL stated twice the videos aren't necessary

 

[BeachSky]

How would he explain his head down to his shoulders out the window before he put Chloe out? Let me think.......

THIS!!!

 

[BeachSky]

JMO, trying to look at this the way an impartial judge or jury would -

The RCCL document, which was very well crafted, stating that SA held her out the window is only a document stating that, the same way almost everyone who has seen the video says. It did not PROVE that by measurement SA was out that window, or that the baby was outside the window until she fell forward.

Thinking about that, this may be where RCCL has stated something as a fact that is not known to be a fact, unless there is a video from outside the ship showing it.

As for Winkleman, he "represents" the Wiegands. IMO it is a little unfair to pin the misrepresentation all on him, when he is only acting as the voice of his clients and can only say what they have told him and approve of.

With all that said, IMO again, AW and SA knew from the beginning that SA was negligent here. SW made a statement to the police, AW supposedly made a statement to the press. It is KW that cannot accept what happened. The other two are deferring to her grief, and afraid to say "no".

Could be Winkleman also is deferring to her, since she is also an attorney, and he knows that if he didn't take the case, another attorney would.

...that last presser, her husband IMO is not holding up well. I agree KW is the driving force of their narrative. There’s got to be more to the backstory of that tragic day. Perhaps she turned the responsibility over to grandfather ,last minute, that day to watch Chloe. She is in very deep denial.

MOO

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

...I'm kind of surprised there isn't additional video that clearly shows what happened. I know ships have outside CTTV cameras to monitor man overboard instances. Are they active when in port? It seems not. So without further video from that or from the dock then what we currently know appears to be the total of videos that captured Chloe's fall. Currently we don't know what higher resolution video shows, only what RCCL claims...

When a ship is in port, most of the time one side of the ship is alongside the pier while the other side of the vessel is flanked by water. Think of it as parallel parking: When you parallel park, one side of your vehicle is along the curb side of the street while the other side of your vehicle is flanked by the street. If Grandpa had held Chloe up to an open window on the starboard side of the ship, she would have fallen into the water. I recall an odd comment that KW made in one of her media interviews: "I thought there would be water on both sides of the ship". The ship was in port at the time of the incident, so only one side of the ship was flanked by water.

Someone mentioned that pier cameras might not belong to RCCL, but I feel certain that there is other surveillance video of the dock side of the ship at the time of the incident. I'm also confident that there is exterior footage on the ship that might or might not show the incident. A passenger on the starboard side of the ship could go overboard when the ship is in port, and port authorities must prevent anyone getting on the vessel who is not a ticketed passenger and/or shipboard officers, staff, or crew.

OT: DH and I are in cruise countdown mode as our winter cruise (for my 70th birthday) is coming up in one week. We will pack this weekend because DH is working through next Thursday, then we're off for a sailing on Sky Princess

 

[oviedo]

I Do believe there are cameras on the pier facing the ship - IMO
Did RCL ask for the video I wonder ?
This is an interesting website
Www.portcanaveralwebcam.com - you can look at other port webcams too

I wonder how many passengers snapped a photo (of the pier) with their phones ?
JMO

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

^ DH and I have been watching the Port Everglades webcam every Saturday to see Sky Princess sail

Here's the webcam link if anyone wants to watch ships sail this afternoon. Check out departure schedule for sailing times (upper left of screen).

Port Everglades Webcam - Live Streaming Video from PTZtv

 

[IceIce9]

How would he explain his head down to his shoulders out the window before he put Chloe out? Let me think.......

Colorblind AND macular degeneration AND shoulder neuropathy AND dementia.

 

[Yellowbeak]

When a ship is in port, most of the time one side of the ship is alongside the pier while the other side of the vessel is flanked by water. Think of it as parallel parking: When you parallel park, one side of your vehicle is along the curb side of the street while the other side of your vehicle is flanked by the street. If Grandpa had held Chloe up to an open window on the starboard side of the ship, she would have fallen into the water. I recall an odd comment that KW made in one of her media interviews: "I thought there would be water on both sides of the ship". The ship was in port at the time of the incident, so only one side of the ship was flanked by water.

Someone mentioned that pier cameras might not belong to RCCL, but I feel certain that there is other surveillance video of the dock side of the ship at the time of the incident. I'm also confident that there is exterior footage on the ship that might or might not show the incident. A passenger on the starboard side of the ship could go overboard when the ship is in port, and port authorities must prevent anyone getting on the vessel who is not a ticketed passenger and/or shipboard officers, staff, or crew.

OT: DH and I are in cruise countdown mode as our winter cruise (for my 70th birthday) is coming up in one week. We will pack this weekend because DH is working through next Thursday, then we're off for a sailing on Sky Princess

I am not sure which pier they were docked at but I was on Harmony of the seas in December and we were docked at San Juan. There was another RCI ship next to us ; so left to right standing forward on ship towards the city: Harmony, pier, Another RC ship. So the other ship was facing the side that she would of fell from. It is possible if another ship was docked there they have footage. Not sure which pier they were at though. I was at the main pier of Ild San Juan. Just a thought...

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

^ I've seen that configuration in various ports, as well. Two ships (or more) share a pier with ships docked on either side of the pier. One side of each ship is dockside, while the other side of the ships are flanked by water. Still another docking situation is ships that cannot fit into a particular slip or pier, so the ship/s anchor out in the harbor with passengers being ferried back and forth to/from the ship.

I still think that there is additional video surveillance that could be used in the criminal trial. RCCL included their video with the Motion for Dismissal even though their attorneys are convinced that the video isn't really necessary to prove why the lawsuit should be dismissed.

 

[Forever Young]

I have been poking around on YouTube, looking for other commentary from La Comay. This is the July 9, 2019 episode, which I believe is the earliest date that the cruise ship incident was discussed.

This episode contains commentary on how the story changed once Winkleman became involved and an animation of how La Comay thinks the fall happened.

They question what is the little barred window on the lowest level of the windows on Deck 11. They don't know.

Off topic. Immediately following the clip about the baby falling, is one of La Comay's regular gimmicks where she makes predictions of a political nature using her crystal ball.

It is absolutely hilarious. I say "regular gimmick" because in looking through these shows, I've come across this act three times so far. The ball glows, she goes into a trance, and reveals the future. In the other shows that I saw, the faces of actual people appear in the glowing ball.

Pertinent video begins at 29 minutes and lasts approximately 20 minutes:

 

[Forever Young]

I have been using the closed caption and translate options on YouTube when viewing the La Comay shows. (Click on the CC icon. Then click on the gear shaped icon - Settings. Select Subtitles CC where is says Spanish. Click on auto-translate and it will allow you to select English from there.)

This show, I can only assume, has inside government informers that supply it with "leaks".

 

[Forever Young]

I am learning a smattering of new Spanish words by this method. One of the strangest is that SA's last name apparently sounds like "anhelo" in Spanish, which translates as "longing", or "yearning". So whenever YouTube translates his last name, it comes up as Salvatore longing, or Salvatore yearning.

I was really puzzled until I figured out what was going on.

 

[al66pine]

Window Positions. What Will the Vids Show?
From Complaint, page 8: "21. An inspection of the scene after the subject incident revealed that all the glass panes around the single open pane of glass were closed and that this was the only single pane, among dozens of panes, that was slid completely open."
Being generous in reading ^, I'd say Winkleman did his best is estimating window positions, but not sure whether accuracy of these allegation matters. Let's think:
Inspection? Who conducted? Parents? RCL crew? LE?
All the "dozens" of glass panes were closed, except one? AFAIK, only windows in the middle row open & close, so is that "dozens" on that wall?
Inspected, when after the incident? 5 min? One hr? 5 hrs? Days?
Anybody could have repositioned any or all operable windows in the span of a few mins.

Presumably, RCL surv cams record views of all Deck 11 windows, so vids at time of incident, will ---
--- Show open/close positions of other windows.
--- Either verify this 'orphan' open window as fact, or reveal claim as inaccurate.
After those vids are shown, little to debate re accuracy of ^ paragraph, imo.

 

[justice4allnow]

Soon all of the Wiegand's friends, family members, supporters and donors will have seen the photos and videos of what Sam did. The immediate family will be further isolated in their grief as those around them begin to understand what really occurred and inevitably begin to withdraw the support offered earlier. Sam's actions truly horrified and confounded most of us as we saw the videos. How will the Wiegands then explain Sam's behavior and the lawsuit to their friends and the public ? I feel very sorry for the family, as they not only lost her daughter but likely delayed their own grieving/healing because of the public campaign and lawsuit. When the suit is dismissed, as I'm sure it will be, they are going to have to deal with that as well. Everything has been so mishandled, starting with that poor child, until now...so sad...

 

[sl222]

...that last presser, her husband IMO is not holding up well. I agree KW is the driving force of their narrative. There’s got to be more to the backstory of that tragic day. Perhaps she turned the responsibility over to grandfather ,last minute, that day to watch Chloe. She is in very deep denial.

MOO

I'm sure KW expected SA to stay at the pool area with Chloe. How awful.

 

[al66pine]

Surv Cam Vid of Ship's Exterior and The Window?

Q.1. Which Dock/Pier Was Ship At? What bldgs or structures were close by? And likely to have surv cams? And w surv cams at angle(s) to take clear vids of SA putting his own head out window?

Q.2. That Day July 7, Was Ship in Same Place as Place Where Complaint Pix Were Taken? If not, then my info at Q.3. does not help us find surv cams which might have recorded SA's head or Chloe outside the ship.

Q.3 Where Was Ship The Day the Complaint Pix Were Taken? I think I've nailed "the where" but not "the when." I enlarged Complaint pic (page 6/para.16) w the shin-high "prison bar" window almost in middle of image, then matched pic against Google Earth. Imo Fr/Seas was at San Juan at PanAmerican pier 1 or 2, adjoining the small airport w runway, taxiway & row of planes, running parallel to ship.
Gotta enlarge the pic quite a bit to see the smallish (many 2 or 4 seater sized) planes.
So on Google Earth & Street View, back to Q.1: does anyone see surv cams that likely captured SA?

Complaint Pix on Fr/Seas were taken in daylight hours, some w. yellow "Caution Do Not Enter tape, closing the area. Since ship left at 10:24 pm Sat* seems likely those pix were not taken same day as poor Chloe's death.
Still leaves unanswered the questions: when were complaint pix taken, and who took them? Is it possible Winkleman used pix PR LE took, as @MsFacetious wondered?

* Relevant times "The incident happened at 4.27pm local time and the ship departed at 10.24pm." Grandad 'had to be sedated' after dropping toddler 150ft to her death on cruise ship. pub July 9
@BetteDavisEyes Snipped below for focus. And Bon Voyage to you & Mr. BDE.

....Someone mentioned that pier cameras might not belong to RCCL.... I'm also confident that there is exterior footage on the ship that might or might not show the incident...

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

Man...the RCCL still shots are truly baffling. It kind of reminds me of the time Michael Jackson held his baby over a balcony.

Which is why those very first witness reports in the news used the words "dangling" and "out the window" and Wink squashed that immediately and said this wasn't the Michael Jackson situation.

 

[al66pine]

I am not sure which pier they were docked at but I was on Harmony of the seas in December and we were docked at San Juan....

@Yellowbeak snipped ^ for focus. Always helpful to hear from someone like you who has been there. I posted a few min ago about where Fr/Seas was docked. if you can use Google Earth (or similar), does that help w any thoughts about where exterior surv cams might be? Thx in adv.
{{{ ETA: I enlarged Complaint pic (page 6/para.16) w the shin-high "prison bar" window almost in middle of image, then matched pic against Google Earth. Imo Fr/Seas was at San Juan at PanAmerican pier 1 or 2, adjoining the small airport w runway, taxiway & row of planes, running parallel to ship.
Gotta enlarge the pic quite a bit to see the smallish (many 2 or 4 seater sized) planes.}}}