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

[loveandhugs]

In my heart I hope I am wrong, but trying to figure why this little girl is dead, and KW is defending SA, and all the other actions since Chloe's death makes me question why? I do not feel that anyone but KW and SA are responsible. Why is KW defending her stepdad? If my mom or dad caused my child's death, I would not be defending them, probably would never speak to them again, my first thought would not be about getting a lawyer to sue a large corporation. I would have been screaming at my mom or dad on the ship, "what happened, what happened", and I would want them to give me an answer right then. Hey, if KW really believes it is the windows fault, then don't sue for money, sue to make windows safer.

So again, somewhere deep in my heart, I unfortunately have a nagging feeling that SA and KW knew before they got on the ship what was about to happen to Chloe. JMO.

 

[LietKynes]

Took a look around and haven't found any updates to this case.
Afaik, SA is going to fight this so we'll be updated when it goes to trial.
Wonder if the prosecution has taken a look at the defendant's computer and phone records ?
As of now SA's being charged with negligent homicide.
Wondering if PR will upgrade the charges ?

 

[loveandhugs]

In my heart I hope I am wrong, but trying to figure why this little girl is dead, and KW is defending SA, and all the other actions since Chloe's death makes me question why? I do not feel that anyone but KW and SA are responsible. Why is KW defending her stepdad? If my mom or dad caused my child's death, I would not be defending them, probably would never speak to them again, my first thought would not be about getting a lawyer to sue a large corporation. I would have been screaming at my mom or dad on the ship, "what happened, what happened", and I would want them to give me an answer right then. Hey, if KW really believes it is the windows fault, then don't sue for money, sue to make windows safer.

So again, somewhere deep in my heart, I unfortunately have a nagging feeling that SA and KW knew before they got on the ship what was about to happen to Chloe. JMO.

In my heart I hope I am wrong, but trying to figure why this little girl is dead, and KW is defending SA, and all the other actions since Chloe's death makes me question why? I do not feel that anyone but KW and SA are responsible. Why is KW defending her stepdad? If my mom or dad caused my child's death, I would not be defending them, probably would never speak to them again, my first thought would not be about getting a lawyer to sue a large corporation. I would have been screaming at my mom or dad on the ship, "what happened, what happened", and I would want them to give me an answer right then. Hey, if KW really believes it is the windows fault, then don't sue for money, sue to make windows safer.

So again, somewhere deep in my heart, I unfortunately have a nagging feeling that SA and KW knew before they got on the ship what was about to happen to Chloe. JMO.

I am answering my own post above. I like to walk, and when I do I am alone with my thoughts. I was thinking in regards to the above, I think SA would have had to had drinks and or drugs if he knew what he was about to do. Perhaps that his why he and KW did not want him to have a breathalyzer or blood test because he needed to be numb emotionally. This is just my thoughts, not saying this is what happened.

Also I was wondering. If someone runs a red light, kills someone, can they say I thought the light was green and then sue the state because they didn't know the light was red?

 

[mheido67]

In my heart I hope I am wrong, but trying to figure why this little girl is dead, and KW is defending SA, and all the other actions since Chloe's death makes me question why? I do not feel that anyone but KW and SA are responsible. Why is KW defending her stepdad? If my mom or dad caused my child's death, I would not be defending them, probably would never speak to them again, my first thought would not be about getting a lawyer to sue a large corporation. I would have been screaming at my mom or dad on the ship, "what happened, what happened", and I would want them to give me an answer right then. Hey, if KW really believes it is the windows fault, then don't sue for money, sue to make windows safer.

So again, somewhere deep in my heart, I unfortunately have a nagging feeling that SA and KW knew before they got on the ship what was about to happen to Chloe. JMO.

I am answering my own post above. I like to walk, and when I do I am alone with my thoughts. I was thinking in regards to the above, I think SA would have had to had drinks and or drugs if he knew what he was about to do. Perhaps that his why he and KW did not want him to have a breathalyzer or blood test because he needed to be numb emotionally. This is just my thoughts, not saying this is what happened.

Also I was wondering. If someone runs a red light, kills someone, can they say I thought the light was green and then sue the state because they didn't know the light was red?

RE: Driving while colorblind. It is legal for colorblind people to drive (assuming they have a valid drivers license). Stop lights are uniform throughout the country, red light on top, green on the bottom (R= left, G= right for horizontal lights). So it doesn’t matter what color you see, your visual clue is which light is illuminated if you are colorblind. So no, colorblind people can’t run people down with impunity.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

In my heart I hope I am wrong, but trying to figure why this little girl is dead, and KW is defending SA, and all the other actions since Chloe's death makes me question why? I do not feel that anyone but KW and SA are responsible. Why is KW defending her stepdad? If my mom or dad caused my child's death, I would not be defending them, probably would never speak to them again, my first thought would not be about getting a lawyer to sue a large corporation. I would have been screaming at my mom or dad on the ship, "what happened, what happened", and I would want them to give me an answer right then. Hey, if KW really believes it is the windows fault, then don't sue for money, sue to make windows safer.

So again, somewhere deep in my heart, I unfortunately have a nagging feeling that SA and KW knew before they got on the ship what was about to happen to Chloe. JMO.

BBM Looking at everything we know from all angles, there kind of is no other conclusion we can come to. IMHO.

 

[loveandhugs]

RE: Driving while colorblind. It is legal for colorblind people to drive (assuming they have a valid drivers license). Stop lights are uniform throughout the country, red light on top, green on the bottom (R= left, G= right for horizontal lights). So it doesn’t matter what color you see, your visual clue is which light is illuminated if you are colorblind. So no, colorblind people can’t run people down with impunity.

My comment was tongue in cheek, SA saying he thought the window was closed, is almost like someone saying I thought the traffic light was green as an excuse for running a red light.

I am still amazed how fast MW was hired, as people on this board have said, shouldn't there have been a period of grieving. Also, doesn't it take awhile for a lawyer to talk to his client to find out all the facts, MW seemed to know all about the family in a short period of time.

 

[LietKynes]

My comment was tongue in cheek, SA saying he thought the window was closed, is almost like someone saying I thought the traffic light was green as an excuse for running a red light.

I am still amazed how fast MW was hired, as people on this board have said, shouldn't there have been a period of grieving. Also, doesn't it take awhile for a lawyer to talk to his client to find out all the facts, MW seemed to know all about the family in a short period of time.

Agreed.
Yes, most of us know that you didn't mean anyone should be run over without consequences.
Considering SA and the families' lies about what SA was doing.... It wouldn't be surprising if they thought a green/red light was an excuse for running down pedestrians. Lol.
Any way they can spin a story.

The first msm article said that Winkleman was hired within 24 hours of Chloe's negligent homicide, but another poster narrowed down the timeline to within much less than 24 hours of her passing.
Winkleman cannot be upheld as the most trusted source.

 

[justice4allnow]

As to whether or not this was intentional, think back to watching an early video shared here on WS, a tour of deck 11 with audio that is on youtube, made by a happy guy on board. As he walks about, it is immediately clear which windows are open, which shut. Sam had been on board several hours when this occurred. If we could tell immediately, on a video, which windows were open, how could he not tell, standing there in person? And we know that there was more than one window open, so this was not the only opening in a wall of glass.
The earliest reports said that he had her in the window sill and out the window. It was Winkleman who began claiming that she was on the safety railing. Even he, when the re-creation of the scene was done, had the doll standing on the window sill. If that window had been closed, how could a toddler have fit on that narrow windowsill? Sam admits that he was holding her with one arm. Even Winkleman admits that at some point Sam let go of her. Who would do this? This simply cannot be an accident. She could have fallen backward and fractured her skull.
And think back to the photo of the windows that dad Al took that night, after the accident. At night it is much harder to tell, in the dark, which windows are open. Why did Al choose to photograph the windows at night? Why would he do this?
Let go of the idea that this was an accident for a moment, those who believe this, and think of Sam, slumped and kneeling by the column, gathering his courage perhaps, and then moving to the window and quickly hoisting Chloe up and out. Does it make any sense to treat a toddler this way? Think: he let go for a moment, holding a baby in a windowsill.
No, I do not see this as anything other than very deliberate.

 

[justbreathe]

I don’t discount that not wanting to create doubt that SA was not responsible in their minds played into the decision not to watch the video. Perhaps because the thought of tearing their family even more apart is not something they want to do. People often don’t want to face the hard things. Especially regarding g family members. It’s a bit of a defense mechanism.

Bringing forth a lawsuit where everything will be dragged out publicly seems and odd was to avoid facing the truth. But then there would be no big payday.

 

[justbreathe]

bbm
Yes, they'd board at an upper level --I'd imagine the same entrance for all of the passengers except the staff/employees ?
Somewhat like an airplane boarding ?

This wasn't their first cruise, they'd sailed before with Disney cruises.
KSW would have known which side was the pier and which was the open sea; imo.
She is an odd one to figure out... but she's not stupid.
She'd know the difference between 'port' and 'starboard'.
Do they still call it that ?
Where's that poster who was going on a cruise ?
Eta : Sorry it was "they'll get you"; but I think it was a different person either going on or returning from a cruise.
Same line but a different ship.
And a similar window type, I think ??

My query about the water was thinking along a different theory, that may be revealed at the court trial if SA doesn't take any plea deal offered.
As far as I know he has refused any deals.
He and Chloe's parents are not showing signs of backing down and they will fight for their payout until the bitter end.
Or so it would appear.
Someone pointed out in an earlier thread that SA being jailed for 3 years or so might or might not affect the lawsuit.
Wonder if Winkleman is still hanging on to the Wiegands' ?

Pretty tough to argue it was the ship’s fault if a criminal court already determined it was in fact SA’s fault.

 

[JerseySleuth17]

As to whether or not this was intentional, think back to watching an early video shared here on WS, a tour of deck 11 with audio that is on youtube, made by a happy guy on board. As he walks about, it is immediately clear which windows are open, which shut. Sam had been on board several hours when this occurred. If we could tell immediately, on a video, which windows were open, how could he not tell, standing there in person? And we know that there was more than one window open, so this was not the only opening in a wall of glass.
The earliest reports said that he had her in the window sill and out the window. It was Winkleman who began claiming that she was on the safety railing. Even he, when the re-creation of the scene was done, had the doll standing on the window sill. If that window had been closed, how could a toddler have fit on that narrow windowsill? Sam admits that he was holding her with one arm. Even Winkleman admits that at some point Sam let go of her. Who would do this? This simply cannot be an accident. She could have fallen backward and fractured her skull.
And think back to the photo of the windows that dad Al took that night, after the accident. At night it is much harder to tell, in the dark, which windows are open. Why did Al choose to photograph the windows at night? Why would he do this?
Let go of the idea that this was an accident for a moment, those who believe this, and think of Sam, slumped and kneeling by the column, gathering his courage perhaps, and then moving to the window and quickly hoisting Chloe up and out. Does it make any sense to treat a toddler this way? Think: he let go for a moment, holding a baby in a windowsill.
No, I do not see this as anything other than very deliberate.

I agree completely. He absolutely knew the window was open. Right before he falls, his right arm/hand is occupied, possibly getting a camera, who knows, but at that point he's holding an 18 month old baby in front of an open window with one hand. To me what is suspicious as well is the lack of instinctual reaction - I have literally dropped a glass of water with more of a reaction than SA showed when CW fell. There is ZERO lunging forward, arms outstretched, knee jerk reaction to try and catch her - that's just instinctual if something you are holding falls. I've dropped my phone many times and even though it's way out of my reach my arm is still outstretched trying to grab it. She falls out the window, and you see him fall *backwards*. Where is the attempt to grab her?? And if there is no attempt, how in the world could you be holding a baby in front of an open window with such recklessness and distraction you don't even realize she's falling until it's too late to grab her?? He knew the window was open. The entire "I thought the window was closed" is a red herring that imo takes away from the real focus which should be - you knew the window was open. Why were you holding a baby in front of an open window 11 stories up?? And why did you only hold her with one hand to reach for your phone? He was in front of that window with her SO LONG that her falling out HAD to be the end result at some point!! I mean literally it's like after 30 seconds he just props her up in front of the window now with only one hand like ok at some point she's going to fall out. It's insanity that this family defends his actions and blames the cruise ship.

 

[justbreathe]

Something I have always wondered since this incident...what exactly was KW told before she ran to the window and looked out? I can’t imagine that someone would have bluntly said, “your daughter fell out of the window.” More likely it would have been something like, “there has been a tragic accident involving your daughter.” Further, how would anyone know that she was the mother to tell her about the accident? Did she just happen upon the chaotic scene and see SA and assume there was a accident? I don’t recall any details of how KW found out.

KW said her son was the first person to tell her something happened to Chloe. She didn’t say exactly what he said.

Maybe SA was in his “I thought there was glass” mantra, and she figured?

I think I read people were trying to hold her back.

The grandmother’s first reaction included saying, “Why is there an open window on the 11th floor?”

 

[justbreathe]

bbm
Sorry-- I answered and I think you were looking for someone else to chime in.
Doesn't appear to be many posting on this thread....so thanks for keeping it alive and kicking.

There's other theories ....but if -- and when -- this goes to trial we may be able to discuss it further.

As for now I'm curious about what the 'ship errand' KW had to leave Chloe with SA for ?
Was there no one else that was more trustworthy ?
Why him ?

Or no one else to take care of this errand?

 

[TDoc72]

I’d like to ask the parents that if a stranger had lifted Chloe over the rail and out (or nearly out) the window & she fell to her death, would they still consider that the ship’s/RCC’s fault? Or would it be the stranger’s?

 

[Lawsmygame2]

Ita.
It takes very little effort to see online what they are asking for in regards to their finances ; regarding the excellent post # 95.
The results are mystifying and the request for funds beggar belief.
Hypothetically speaking, these are not the actions of destitute people.
Why connect Chloe to banging on hockey glass at all ?
Not to mention they've already met some of their goals ; so people are supportive of them despite their actions.
It's a strange world.
Part of this cannot be solely laid at Winkleman's feet nor the attorney for SA.

I noticed there have been limited donations since the release of the video. Maybe because the video shows who was really to blame...SA. JMO

 

[justbreathe]

In my heart I hope I am wrong, but trying to figure why this little girl is dead, and KW is defending SA, and all the other actions since Chloe's death makes me question why? I do not feel that anyone but KW and SA are responsible. Why is KW defending her stepdad? If my mom or dad caused my child's death, I would not be defending them, probably would never speak to them again, my first thought would not be about getting a lawyer to sue a large corporation. I would have been screaming at my mom or dad on the ship, "what happened, what happened", and I would want them to give me an answer right then. Hey, if KW really believes it is the windows fault, then don't sue for money, sue to make windows safer.

So again, somewhere deep in my heart, I unfortunately have a nagging feeling that SA and KW knew before they got on the ship what was about to happen to Chloe. JMO.

I am answering my own post above. I like to walk, and when I do I am alone with my thoughts. I was thinking in regards to the above, I think SA would have had to had drinks and or drugs if he knew what he was about to do. Perhaps that his why he and KW did not want him to have a breathalyzer or blood test because he needed to be numb emotionally. This is just my thoughts, not saying this is what happened.

I agree! I bet it took some numbing of the senses for this travesty to occur. And I bet seeing her falling all the way was quite an unpleasant shock.

 

[Lawsmygame2]

bbm
First bolded: The red lipstick was a nice touch.
Seriously, though --it was as if she was gearing up for the largest and most important court case of her career.
SA was 'innocent' and she's going to make sure he isn't handed a jail sentence.
So in a way it might be her most lucrative case.

Second bolded : Yes, it is beyond belief. Along with the crying that matched SA's 'tears'.
At some point one of the other family members may turn against SA and KSW.
Then watch the fur fly !

Going to be a long, drawn-out case and shows no sign of stopping yet.

Anyone else notice the unusual way KW says “visiting her urn” in the video? And the pause for effect afterwards? Then the instant leap into RCCL’s major role...?

 

[redabby]

I agree completely. He absolutely knew the window was open. Right before he falls, his right arm/hand is occupied, possibly getting a camera, who knows, but at that point he's holding an 18 month old baby in front of an open window with one hand. To me what is suspicious as well is the lack of instinctual reaction - I have literally dropped a glass of water with more of a reaction than SA showed when CW fell. There is ZERO lunging forward, arms outstretched, knee jerk reaction to try and catch her - that's just instinctual if something you are holding falls. I've dropped my phone many times and even though it's way out of my reach my arm is still outstretched trying to grab it. She falls out the window, and you see him fall *backwards*. Where is the attempt to grab her?? And if there is no attempt, how in the world could you be holding a baby in front of an open window with such recklessness and distraction you don't even realize she's falling until it's too late to grab her?? He knew the window was open. The entire "I thought the window was closed" is a red herring that imo takes away from the real focus which should be - you knew the window was open. Why were you holding a baby in front of an open window 11 stories up?? And why did you only hold her with one hand to reach for your phone? He was in front of that window with her SO LONG that her falling out HAD to be the end result at some point!! I mean literally it's like after 30 seconds he just props her up in front of the window now with only one hand like ok at some point she's going to fall out. It's insanity that this family defends his actions and blames the cruise ship.

Funny you should mention a glass of water, a few years ago I stayed at a holiday cottage where they had these stupid hand decorated mugs. On the last morning before I left I came down the narrow stairs with a mug of tea and slipped. Not wanting to break the mug I fell in such a way as to save the mug but managed to severely hurt my elbow.
So I agree there seems to be no attempt to reach out after her, no attempt to try and grab her, which is just normal human instinct.
I am still in the camp whereby I don't believe his intent was to purposely kill her but that he is an arrogant narcissist who believed he couldn't drop her or was (and) under an influence. I still wonder though if even subconsciously he gets a thrill from reckless activities and he got a thrill as he held her dear little life in his hands.

 

[Lawsmygame2]

I just saw this video tonight. I don’t know how I missed it before. Notice in this video DB shows a picture of the view of what supposedly SA saw when “he was looking down at Chloe” before he lifted her “onto the railing.” DB said that while looking down Chloe, SA saw the glass in the lower window so it was reasonable that he thought there was glass in the window he lifted Chloe to. Hummmm...I thought that he could not see glass because of his colorblindness? So if he could see glass in that window, why couldn’t he see that there was no glass in the upper window? If you can see glass when it is there, you would know that there is no glass... JMO

 

[redabby]

I just saw this video tonight. I don’t know how I missed it before. Notice in this video DB shows a picture of the view of what supposedly SA saw when “he was looking down at Chloe” before he lifted her “onto the railing.” DB said that while looking down Chloe, SA saw the glass in the lower window so it was reasonable that he thought there was glass in the window he lifted Chloe to. Hummmm...I thought that he could not see glass because of his colorblindness? So if he could see glass in that window, why couldn’t he see that there was no glass in the upper window? If you can see glass when it is there, you would know that there is no glass... JMO

Wow good catch, you can either see the glass or you cant .