IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #8

[HRH Phoebe Cat]

Why are so many people shocked at how fast she lawyered up if she IS a lawyer? Duh?

You make a good point. In their initial shock and horror, I could certainly understand the parents slipping into professional mode. There is speculation that AW took those initial photos on the ship of the crime scene (but never confirmed IIRC) that Winkleman trotted out. Well, LE does those sorts of things. As a lawyer, KSW getting the legal ball rolling...

The problem for me is the disconnect and contradiction of being in professional mode in the initial shock and horror phase is them or trusted designee not watching the video.

As always, struggling a bit with the wording here but hoping my train of thought is clear enough.

 

[JerseySleuth17]

I don't view it as likely intentional because SA had no guarantee that Puerto Rico police were not going to arrest him on the spot for murder and the courts deny bail. I do not know what he would gain from the death of Chloe but whatever it might be seems unlikely to be worth years in the pokey.

His actions could be intentional and still not premeditated. Maybe he wasn't planning on doing what he did until the opportunity arose, but when he saw the window, the way he lifts CW up with one arm (most people imo would crouch down and pick a child that age up with two hands, one on each side), and then at the end is only loosely holding her with one hand while he reaches for his camera - and then he lets her go! I don't see anything in that video indicating she jerked or wiggled away from him, she is literally standing there, and then she falls straight forward out the window. He doesn't try to catch her in any way. There are plenty of people who commit crimes they are definitely not parsing out the repercussions of their actions at the time, their mind is in a whole other place. I am having trouble wrapping my head around how he could have thought the outcome would be anything other than what it was when he's holding her with one hand, and then let's her go. So in my opinion on some level this was his intentional action.

 

[JerseySleuth17]

You make a good point. In their initial shock and horror, I could certainly understand the parents slipping into professional mode. There is speculation that AW took those initial photos on the ship of the crime scene (but never confirmed IIRC) that Winkleman trotted out. Well, LE does those sorts of things. As a lawyer, KSW getting the legal ball rolling...

The problem for me is the disconnect and contradiction of being in professional mode in the initial shock and horror phase is them or trusted designee not watching the video.

As always, struggling a bit with the wording here but hoping my train of thought is clear enough.

I get that she's a lawyer and as such her initial reaction is to blame someone and sue. But - especially after the video came out, it is ridiculous to try to blame the cruise line for what happened. AND, she defended SA and called what he did a "misdemeanor". He killed your child either intentionally or at a minimum with pure recklessness. That's when they lost me. In their interviews the arguments they are making are so ridiculous - put screens up? Screens are even more dangerous because they cannot hold a child's weight and give a false sense of safety. And the speed in which they ramped everything up - most people would not be opening an estate for their dead baby 8 days after death. You have months to do this. Even if you were being generous that they just wanted to place their blame on someone to channel their grief and anger - how about placing it on the person who actually killed your child?? What is incredibly off-putting for me is they are coming up with ludicrous allegations against a cruise line (deep $ pockets) when the cause of CW's death is solely on SA. That's why people are so put off by the speed in which they instituted the lawsuit. Imo.

 

[neesaki]

KW & Chloe were said to be playing in the H2O zone after lunch. It was also said that SA had to come up and watch Chloe because KW needed to take care of ? AW & son were at another pool on the ship, I originally thought it was on another floor, but someone recently corrected me on my assumption, and said the pools are on the same deck.

Why didn't KW simply walk Chloe over to AW and ask him to watch while she took care of ? Why did she call SA to come up and watch Chloe?

MOO

Interesting point, and good question.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

I get that she's a lawyer and as such her initial reaction is to blame someone and sue. But - especially after the video came out, it is ridiculous to try to blame the cruise line for what happened. AND, she defended SA and called what he did a "misdemeanor". He killed your child either intentionally or at a minimum with pure recklessness. That's when they lost me. In their interviews the arguments they are making are so ridiculous - put screens up? Screens are even more dangerous because they cannot hold a child's weight and give a false sense of safety. And the speed in which they ramped everything up - most people would not be opening an estate for their dead baby 8 days after death. You have months to do this. Even if you were being generous that they just wanted to place their blame on someone to channel their grief and anger - how about placing it on the person who actually killed your child?? What is incredibly off-putting for me is they are coming up with ludicrous allegations against a cruise line (deep $ pockets) when the cause of CW's death is solely on SA. That's why people are so put off by the speed in which they instituted the lawsuit. Imo.

Excellent spot-on post, ITA!

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Interesting point, and good question.

The whereabouts of all family members at the time of the incident will come out in a trial. I, too, am curious about SA being asked to babysit Chloe when there were other adults in the family group. Where was Grandpa at the time? Was he on the same deck, or did KW call him from another part of the ship? I don't espouse conspiracy theories, but why was SA summoned to care for Chloe instead of one of the other (more responsible) family members?

 

[JulieBEMT]

Why are so many people shocked at how fast she lawyered up if she IS a lawyer? Duh?

I get that she's a lawyer and as such her initial reaction is to blame someone and sue. But - especially after the video came out, it is ridiculous to try to blame the cruise line for what happened. AND, she defended SA and called what he did a "misdemeanor". He killed your child either intentionally or at a minimum with pure recklessness. That's when they lost me. In their interviews the arguments they are making are so ridiculous - put screens up? Screens are even more dangerous because they cannot hold a child's weight and give a false sense of safety. And the speed in which they ramped everything up - most people would not be opening an estate for their dead baby 8 days after death. You have months to do this. Even if you were being generous that they just wanted to place their blame on someone to channel their grief and anger - how about placing it on the person who actually killed your child?? What is incredibly off-putting for me is they are coming up with ludicrous allegations against a cruise line (deep $ pockets) when the cause of CW's death is solely on SA. That's why people are so put off by the speed in which they instituted the lawsuit. Imo.

The statute of limitations on a civil suit is two years. They had MW down to Puerto Rico doing a press conference 36 hours after their baby was killed. They hired a civil lawyer before they hired a criminal lawyer, before they got their child home and went on a national media tour before her funeral. IMO, all of this was in incredibly poor taste, and is what lost them public sympathy well before most people realized that SA dropped her out a window.

 

[Montrealaise]

Baby Chloe could not have fallen out the window to her death without the grandfather raising the child to the guard rail and/or window and for that, he is believed negligent and charged appropriately.

But planned homicide?

Not even the San Juan investigators or the prosecutor's office have ever made an allegation that the grandfather acted with malice.

The lesser charge of negligent homicide filed against the grandfather certainly doesn't reflect a planned, premeditated homicide. Technically, his charge is a misdemeanor.

MOO

I know that posters on this site think that SA's actions were deliberate because they just can't believe anyone could be this stupid, but having read quite a few news stories about children who died as a result of their parent's or caregiver's negligence - I believe it. Reading about what they did (or failed to do) my reaction was, what in the name of all that is holy was this person THINKING? They weren't thinking, that's the problem. SA didn't "think" that hoisting a toddler onto a window sill eleven stories up could be dangerous; he didn't "think" that holding her with only one arm could lead to disaster.

 

[Wicked Strong]

I found this news article when I was looking for information about SA's criminal charges. It mainly references that SA was advised by his lawyer not to give an official statement. The accident happened on Sunday and this indicates he retained criminal lawyers before he was talking to PR officials on Wednesday. It also says that KW & AW talked with PR officials on Tuesday. Repeats several times in the article that no one from the family will give statements to PR, so PR allowed them to go home for a few weeks to bury Chloe and to grieve and they would ask them to come back afterwards.

It mentions MW in the story dated 7-12, so IMO he was a big part of their decision early.

It also said that a photo of the windows at night was taken by Chloe's father.

https://wsbuzz.com/world-news/grandfather-of-toddler-who-died-on-cruise-ship-arrives-in-chicago/

MOO

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

The statute of limitations on a civil suit is two years. They had MW down to Puerto Rico doing a press conference 36 hours after their baby was killed. They hired a civil lawyer before they hired a criminal lawyer, before they got their child home and went on a national media tour before her funeral. IMO, all of this was in incredibly poor taste, and is what lost them public sympathy well before most people realized that SA dropped her out a window.

 

[sl222]

The whereabouts of all family members at the time of the incident will come out in a trial. I, too, am curious about SA being asked to babysit Chloe when there were other adults in the family group. Where was Grandpa at the time? Was he on the same deck, or did KW call him from another part of the ship? I don't espouse conspiracy theories, but why was SA summoned to care for Chloe instead of one of the other (more responsible) family members?

I have often thought that the 4 grandparents may have been in their rooms after the meal, and some of them may have been napping. I hope the details will come out in the trial or the filings.

 

[Wehwalt]

I wonder if SA is convicted, whether KW will file a victim impact statement or draft him a notice of appeal?

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I have often thought that the 4 grandparents may have been in their rooms after the meal, and some of them may have been napping. I hope the details will come out in the trial or the filings.

Original media reports indicated that the rest of the family was at the buffet when the incident with Chloe took place. We discussed this on the first thread about the case that has since been deleted (or archived). We debated different reasons why Grandpa was with Chloe: SA wanted to smoke (not allowed in dining areas), Chloe was restless and didn't want to sit still for a meal, Chloe wasn't hungry or had already eaten, etc.

That scenario and subsequent discussion changed when it became known that the family wasn't at the buffet and had probably finished lunch a while ago. KW and Chloe were allegedly playing together in the splash pad, and Chloe's brother was said to be in a pool with AW. I don't know where either set of grandparents were or how SA came to be the one adult who was called to babysit Chloe. Maybe KW called her mother/SA's stateroom to ask for one of them to come to watch Chloe for a few minutes, and Patsy was napping or unpacking, so SA offered to go.

 

[sl222]

Original media reports indicated that the rest of the family was at the buffet when the incident with Chloe took place. We discussed this on the first thread about the case that has since been deleted (or archived). We debated different reasons why Grandpa was with Chloe: SA wanted to smoke (not allowed in dining areas), Chloe was restless and didn't want to sit still for a meal, Chloe wasn't hungry, etc.

That scenario and subsequent discussion changed when it became known that the family wasn't at the buffet and had probably finished lunch a while ago. KW and Chloe were allegedly playing together in the splash pad, and Chloe's brother was said to be in a pool with AW. I don't know where either set of grandparents were or how SA came to be the one adult who was called to babysit Chloe. Maybe KW called her mother/SA's stateroom to ask for one of them to come to watch Chloe for a few minutes, and Patsy was napping or unpacking, so SA offered to go.

I definitely remember that. In the last couple of months it's become hard to keep posting at the level I used to due to the tough stuff this is all about. I think your scenario makes sense - KW calling her mother's room etc.

Our original threads were all fine so I hope they will be restored.

 

[fabvab]

I found this news article when I was looking for information about SA's criminal charges. It mainly references that SA was advised by his lawyer not to give an official statement. The accident happened on Sunday and this indicates he retained criminal lawyers before he was talking to PR officials on Wednesday. It also says that KW & AW talked with PR officials on Tuesday. Repeats several times in the article that no one from the family will give statements to PR, so PR allowed them to go home for a few weeks to bury Chloe and to grieve and they would ask them to come back afterwards.

It mentions MW in the story dated 7-12, so IMO he was a big part of their decision early.

It also said that a photo of the windows at night was taken by Chloe's father.

https://wsbuzz.com/world-news/grandfather-of-toddler-who-died-on-cruise-ship-arrives-in-chicago/

MOO

I’m not sure I understand why they were allowed to go home before giving a statement. Shouldn’t statements be given as soon as possible after an incident when your memory is fresh? If Chloe’s dad was able to take crime scene pics that evening, then there is no reason for him to not give a statement too!

 

[neesaki]

I’m not sure I understand why they were allowed to go home before giving a statement. Shouldn’t statements be given as soon as possible after an incident when your memory is fresh? If Chloe’s dad was able to take crime scene pics that evening, then there is no reason for him to not give a statement too!

I agree. They weren’t really “allowed” to leave, as they were supposed to meet with LE before they left PR, instead they left the island without notice, on the sly.

If they were capable of calling a civil attorney and getting in “sue the cruise line” mode, seems to me they should have also been capable of giving LE their statements. Usually can’t have it both ways, but somehow they managed to.

No interest at all in justice for their baby. SMDH

 

[al66pine]

No Statements to PR LE?

I’m not sure I understand why they were allowed to go home before giving a statement. Shouldn’t statements be given as soon as possible after an incident when your memory is fresh? If Chloe’s dad was able to take crime scene pics that evening, then there is no reason for him to not give a statement too!

. @fabvab Yes, ideally LE should take stmts ASAP after event in question.
Not to be a smart-*advertiser censored**, but imo at that time PR LE (thought they) did not have probable cause to arrest, so no basis for holding. (In U.S, constitutional rights.)

 

[al66pine]

I agree. They weren’t really “allowed” to leave, as they were supposed to meet with LE before they left PR, instead they left the island without notice, on the sly....

[SIZE=4]]@neesaki[/SIZE] sbm Re: "not really 'allowed' to leave" and "on the sly?" I do not recall MSM to this effect but could have missed it. A link pls? Anyone?

 

[Wehwalt]

I’m not sure I understand why they were allowed to go home before giving a statement. Shouldn’t statements be given as soon as possible after an incident when your memory is fresh? If Chloe’s dad was able to take crime scene pics that evening, then there is no reason for him to not give a statement too!

As a practical matter, they can't be stopped from leaving if they insist and given the professions of the Wiegands they would have known this.

 

[Laria Rivera]

Tomorrow Monday February 24th is the next Court hearing in Puerto Rico for SA, we’ll see what happens.