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

[neesaki]

Snipped and BBM. I agree. I thought a very interesting compromise would be millions of dollars granted to RCCL as a forced payment to make the windows safe guarded with a minimal payout to the family. If they really are about "protecting future children" they should have no problem in the world. And perhaps a Chloe's Rule inforcement on all cruise ships, no alcohol served to people who are with children.

Are you purposely being funny? I mean... idk.

 

[neesaki]

DBM, DOUBLE POST

 

[neesaki]

I am not sure if windows opening outward, would be stable in the high winds at sea. I think they open now the way they do for safety's sake.

What if an open window, hanging outward by a hinge, fell off in heavy winds. Someone down below could easily die. JMO

That’s a really good point, katydid.... I think the shipping industry has the window thing figured out. Well, they’ve only done it for .... how many years?

So beyond that, does anyone in their right mind pick up a baby, then put her out a window... hell... even CLOSE to a window, Eleven stories above ground? No, they don’t.

 

[al66pine]

$$ from What Source? Chloe's Rule?

Snipped and BBM. I agree. I thought a very interesting compromise would be millions of dollars granted to RCCL as a forced payment to make the windows safe guarded with a minimal payout to the family. If they really are about "protecting future children" they should have no problem in the world. And perhaps a Chloe's Rule inforcement on all cruise ships, no alcohol served to people who are with children.

@Chewy, I'm missing something here. Or maybe should not take this ^ literally.
$$ from what source, to go to RCL?
And to whom would this proposed Chloe's Rule apply?
For ex, w Chloe's group would it have applied only to parents or all six adults? For entire cruise?

 

[neesaki]

Dbm

 

[neesaki]

Snipped and BBM. I agree. I thought a very interesting compromise would be millions of dollars granted to RCCL as a forced payment to make the windows safe guarded with a minimal payout to the family. If they really are about "protecting future children" they should have no problem in the world. And perhaps a Chloe's Rule inforcement onall cruise ships, no alcohol served to people who are with children.

What are you saying ?

 

[Chewy]

$$ from What Source? Chloe's Rule?
@Chewy, I'm missing something here. Or maybe should not take this ^ literally.
$$ from what source, to go to RCL?
And to whom would this proposed Chloe's Rule apply?
For ex, w Chloe's group would it have applied only to parents or all six adults? For entire cruise?

My point is that if the parents are really "only suing to protect other children and families" then why would they take the money from the RCCL rather than go to court and have the ruling be that whatever money they would have gotten be used to improve the safety of windows on the boats? And there is no Chloe's rule but as I have stated before, drinking when you are watching children that small is wrong in my opinion. I don't care if you are in the safety of your own home, anything could go wrong and if you drink with small children Chloe's age you are a bad parent. Parenting means you don't get to have the same life you did before you had kids. I had three kids and when they will little I didn't drink for 12 years. I can't fathom the idea that a decent parent would drink anything when watching a baby, a toddler or a child under 12 years old.

So no, I don't think it's a fun family trip for parents to get drunk when they are out with their children. I think this kind of behavior has gotten out of control in the US and Europe and it's shocking to me that mothers especially think this is OK.

How many times has alcohol played a contributing role in something like this? It's dangerous and wrong.

The reason I say enforce it on the Cruise is that it's well known that cruises push alcohol like crazy. Setting up a 'family fun" cruise and then pushing alcohol is equally wrong on the part of RCCL.

Here is an article about the epidemic of mothers of small children drinking.

Why mommy drinks: The scary truth about #WineMom

 

[Midwestmom2019]

My point is that if the parents are really "only suing to protect other children and families" then why would they take the money from the RCCL rather than go to court and have the ruling be that whatever money they would have gotten be used to improve the safety of windows on the boats? And there is no Chloe's rule but as I have stated before, drinking when you are watching children that small is wrong in my opinion. I don't care if you are in the safety of your own home, anything could go wrong and if you drink with small children Chloe's age you are a bad parent. Parenting means you don't get to have the same life you did before you had kids. I had three kids and when they will little I didn't drink for 12 years. I can't fathom the idea that a decent parent would drink anything when watching a baby, a toddler or a child under 12 years old.

So no, I don't think it's a fun family trip for parents to get drunk when they are out with their children. I think this kind of behavior has gotten out of control in the US and Europe and it's shocking to me that mothers especially think this is OK.

How many times has alcohol played a contributing role in something like this? It's dangerous and wrong.

The reason I say enforce it on the Cruise is that it's well known that cruises push alcohol like crazy. Setting up a 'family fun" cruise and then pushing alcohol is equally wrong on the part of RCCL.

Here is an article about the epidemic of mothers of small children drinking.

Why mommy drinks: The scary truth about #WineMom

Wine moms don’t throw their kids out of windows like beer barrel bozos.

 

[Chewy]

Wine moms don’t throw their kids out of windows like beer barrel bozos.

No but they generally neglect their children. I would wager the parents were having a bit of fun which is why they handed her off to SA in the first place. It's utterly ridiculous for a parent of a baby that age to drink at all. There is no other job where you would allow the person to drink while working.

Why is "wine moms" some quirky funny thing to do? How does "wine day care workers" or "wine nurses" or "wine drivers" sound?

It's ridiculous. And children as young as Chloe need parents 24/7. Even if mom has a "girls night out" unless she has another caregiver at home for the rest of the night, she's still being irresponsible.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

No but they generally neglect their children. I would wager the parents were having a bit of fun which is why they handed her off to SA in the first place. It's utterly ridiculous for a parent of a baby that age to drink at all. There is no other job where you would allow the person to drink while working.

Why is "wine moms" some quirky funny thing to do? How does "wine day care workers" or "wine nurses" or "wine drivers" sound?

It's ridiculous. And children as young as Chloe need parents 24/7. Even if mom has a "girls night out" unless she has another caregiver at home for the rest of the night, she's still being irresponsible.

This has nothing to do with wine moms or beer belly bozos. Or parents getting away for a bit of their own time. Family was at a buffet on the same floor. The kid couldn’t sit still at a dinner table so they sent her with SA. She could have been taking a nap. Safer alternative. The guy picked up a toddler, put her up AND OVER a rail and across a window ledge. Then out of the window and dropped her. He’s not color blind. He wasn’t looking for glass to bang on. Drunk, drugged, hungry, angry who cares. He’s a pathetic excuse for an actor. A box of rocks is smarter. Other than SA and Michael Jackson, who do you know that has dangled a toddler across a balcony or out of a window? He’d never put our daughter in danger. Right. He’s done it before we just don’t know about it. Like a rapist starts out just mangling animals. Then progresses. Finally gets violent. It’s probably not his first time doing something really stupid with a baby. He’s been lucky before, that’s all. I wonder if there are siblings of AW and KW. Other kids in the family. But none of it really matters. He did it this time. And she’s dead.

 

[Wehwalt]

There's another reason SA might have chosen a bench trial rather than a jury trial: jury trials take longer and therefore end up being more expensive for the defendant. SA doesn't seem to have much money and has even set up a crowdfunding site to raise money for his legal defense.

Possible, I suppose, but money hasn't been a barrier so far in this case and don't see why SA would take an option he thinks might lead to a poorer outcome, to be cheap.

Probation in Indiana?
@MsMarple, Indiana probation may be the ultimate outcome. But I'm reading the exact phrasing at link a bit differently.
"But if Anello is found guilty, prosecutors will likely recommend a period of probation that can be completed in his native Indiana, the Daily Mail has learned."
--- "prosecutors will likely to recommend." bbm Nothing about the judge's likely sentencing.
--- "the Daily Mail has learned" No source is given. Who said --- LE, prosecutor, peanut gallery?
Jmo re this article. Not reflecting my thoughts about the case, as I hope SA spends time behind bars.

Grandfather who dropped toddler to her death from Royal Caribbean ship window asks for bench trial | Daily Mail Online Feb 24

I read the Guardian, a British paper, and they are quite full of similar phrasings, "it is likely", "it is understood", etc. Other news outlets, even in the US, seem to do the same, but less often. I take it as a way of turning rumor and wishful thinking/advocacy into "news". My personal experience from my practice is that sentencing recommendations after a trial aren't as good as you would have gotten by taking a plea deal.

 

[HRH Phoebe Cat]

“Wearing a black suit, white shirt and patterned blue tie...” Is an actor in costume emphasizing his alleged color blindness? Or does he need a “I dressed myself today” button or badge?

You know, I’m starting to think (and really like the idea) that the DM is throwing shade at SA with this little tidbit along with the overly generous use of “elderly.”

 

[justice4allnow]

SA doesn't seem to have much money and has even set up a crowdfunding site to raise money for his legal defense.

I don't think any of us on WS has any knowledge of Sam's financial situation. He works for the County in IT, which is usually a good salary/benefits package. His partner has been referenced as a judge in other posts, but I don't know where info came from. In any case, it's possible that she has income and assets as well. He looks a little sloppy at times and won't meet anyone's eyes, so that may color the overall impression he gives of struggling. As far as the crowdfunding, this may simply be a pattern with this family-a preference, rather than a need. Earlier on he was saying that he wanted a jury trial-but since then, the Comay video has been widely viewed, don't know if that factored in to his decision for a judge instead.

 

[HRH Phoebe Cat]

You can see that the mother is almost robotic in how she's going through the emotions.

*snip*
That is not my observation and opinion so I must respectfully disagree here. Assuming here that the darned autocorrect changed motions to emotions...my thoughts are that KSW is lit with rage and fury towards RCCL and channeling her professional mode in $eeking a fa$t $ettlement. JMHO.

(Red flag that maybe they were not the most mindful parents is that her son actually on his own showed up next to his sisters body before the mother did...

*snip*
Yes to this...I agree. IIRC the brother was supposed to be swimming with AW. This was not too long after arrival on the ship, a completely new environment. And, unfortunately, ten year olds need supervision for a number of reasons including “stranger danger.”

A lot of people judge her for this and I think this is why some people act like this was a big conspiracy. I honestly think she was just in shock and defensive mode.*snip* I think the guilt and the grief and the shock were just too much, compounded with the fact that it was the grandfather. I honestly feel she just went into "work mode" because it was the only thing she "knew how to do."

*snip*
I do not judge her; I observe her and her actions. And, for the record, I have considerable experience working in hospice care so am well acquainted with grief and differing expressions of its stages. My “gut” says something is really off here.

ETA: It would be remiss of me to not acknowledge my appreciation of this poster’s stating an opinion but also expounding it so well even though my personal thoughts and opinions may differ at times. Not only is choice of wording a continuing struggle for me, I am a firm believer in civilized discourse.

 

[mheido67]

No but they generally neglect their children. I would wager the parents were having a bit of fun which is why they handed her off to SA in the first place. It's utterly ridiculous for a parent of a baby that age to drink at all. There is no other job where you would allow the person to drink while working.

Why is "wine moms" some quirky funny thing to do? How does "wine day care workers" or "wine nurses" or "wine drivers" sound?

It's ridiculous. And children as young as Chloe need parents 24/7. Even if mom has a "girls night out" unless she has another caregiver at home for the rest of the night, she's still being irresponsible.

Sorry, how did this become about KW or AW drinking? Has there been any evidence that either of them was drinking? Or even that they do drink? There's a lot more character assassination going on here than sleuthing. When is someone going to ask AW if he's stopped beating his wife?

 

[Kindred]

This is why I said if they hadn't sued the RCCL they probably wouldn't have prosecuted SA. RCCL has a lot of investments and brings a lot of money to PR. It's in their interest to have him found guilty to reduce the culpability of the company.

snipped for brevity

I keep seeing people posting this. The criminal case was filed FIRST. SA was charged back in November. While the Wiegand's have been threatening to sue since the outset, they didn't actually file until December, about two weeks after. The more likely argument is that the Wiegand's only went ahead and sued RCCL in retaliation for their family member being charged. Not the other way around.

 

[Chewy]

Sorry, how did this become about KW or AW drinking? Has there been any evidence that either of them was drinking? Or even that they do drink? There's a lot more character assassination going on here than sleuthing. When is someone going to ask AW if he's stopped beating his wife?

I didn't mean to insinuate that they definitely were drinking. Just that the possibility was likely. It seems to me that the nature of the cruise it is likely that they were all drinking. But who knows, they could be complete tee totalers. If so good for them. I was bringing it up as a point that the cruise lines that set up these "family packages" type trips and knowingly recruit parents to bring their small kids on board, and then push the consumption of alcohol are wrong.

But that's because I feel like parents of small children shouldn't drink when they are responsible for their children.

I do think SA had been drinking. Otherwise why would KW tell him NOT to take a breathalyzer? But even if he was or wasn't, it has no bearing on his choice to pick CW and hold her by an open window. I just think it's a weird thing that alcohol and children seem to be suddenly this trendy cool thing. And it's even worse when places that target children push it.

 

[mheido67]

I didn't mean to insinuate that they definitely were drinking. Just that the possibility was likely. It seems to me that the nature of the cruise it is likely that they were all drinking. But who knows, they could be complete tee totalers. If so good for them. I was bringing it up as a point that the xruise lines that set up these "family packages" type trips and knowingly recruit parents to bring their small kids on board, and then push the consumption of alcohol are wrong.

But that's because I feel like parents of small children shouldn't drink when they are responsible for their children.

I do think SA had been drinking. Otherwise why would KW tell him NOT to take a breathalyzer? But even if he was or wasn't, it has no bearing on his choice to pick CW and hold her by an open window. I just think it's a weird thing that alcohol and children seem to be suddenly this trendy cool thing. And it's even worse when places that target children push it.

"Otherwise why would KW tell him NOT to take a breathalyzer?"

You find me a defense attorney who would recommend you take a field breathalyzer. Go ahead, I'll wait. What happens if you take the breathalyzer and it returns a false positive? That's now on record regardless of how much you insist you were not drinking. Refuse and it is LE's word against yours. KW is a prosecutor, she knows this. If you have the slightest inkling that you are suspected of a crime you don't freely offer LE ANYTHING they could ultimately use against you.

 

[mheido67]

snipped for brevity

I keep seeing people posting this. The criminal case was filed FIRST. SA was charged back in November. While the Wiegand's have been threatening to sue since the outset, they didn't actually file until December, about two weeks after. The more likely argument is that the Wiegand's only went ahead and sued RCCL in retaliation for their family member being charged. Not the other way around.

I'd imagine it was less a question of retailiation on the part of the Wiegand's and more a matter of holding off on filing their civil lawsuit until they knew if SA was going to be charged or not for fear of not wanting to do anyhting to influence PR LE's decision. I don't think there was ever any doubt that they were ultimately going to sue.

 

[Hughaskton]

I dii I be

I didn't mean to insinuate that they definitely were drinking. Just that the possibility was likely. It seems to me that the nature of the cruise it is likely that they were all drinking. But who knows, they could be complete tee totalers. If so good for them. I was bringing it up as a point that the cruise lines that set up these "family packages" type trips and knowingly recruit parents to bring their small kids on board, and then push the consumption of alcohol are wrong.

But that's because I feel like parents of small children shouldn't drink when they are responsible for their children.

I do think SA had been drinking. Otherwise why would KW tell him NOT to take a breathalyzer? But even if he was or wasn't, it has no bearing on his choice to pick CW and hold her by an open window. I just think it's a weird thing that alcohol and children seem to be suddenly this trendy cool thing. And it's even worse when places that target children push it.

I don’t know if he was drinking, will never know, but I also don’t think it really matters at this point. He wasn’t fall down drunk. I do think if they thought he was legitimately impaired they would have taken the steps to get some kind of test. They actually did speak with him, they have more knowledge than anyone on sm about his abilities that day. I also get trying to find a “reason” he did this, sometimes it’s just a simple answer of, he was reckless and stupid.

I’m not really getting this, “drinking around small kids is trendy” I’m 50. My parents grew up in an era where drinking and smoking was so very normal even when pregnant. Obviously that’s frowned upon now. If people are drinking to the point of impairment around their children and no other person is around to watch small kids, yes that’s irresponsible. But, it’s also ok to have one drink with a dinner on a cruise ship or in your home or even at a restaurant. There are levels of irresponsibility. I think most parents are pretty responsible and are not getting sloshed while watching their kids. Are there ones that do that? Sure, but it’s not the “trendy” thing to do. People joke about needing a glass of wine after a long day with the kids, it doesn’t mean they are out of control, it’s just being funny.

I also think you are reading to much into the, they told him not to take a test. They are both in the world of the law. Her being a lawyer, him an officer. It’s likely they went into that mode and went the, don’t take any kind of test, it can be spun. In my opinion, I think as a parent I would want him to take a test to prove he was not impaired, but I also can look at it from the other perspective and understand it. Doesn’t mean I agree, just that I get it.