GUILTY IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #9 *NO JAIL*

[Laria Rivera]

The courts in Puerto Rico just cancelled all hearings and trials for the next two weeks.
No SA trial this week.

 

[In vino veritas]

The courts in Puerto Rico just cancelled all hearings and trials for the next two weeks.
No SA trial this week.

Thanks for the update LR!!

 

[Laria Rivera]

Here is the press release in English for the court closures in Puerto Rico.

 

[TDoc72]

By the way, banging on the glass is not encouraged at hockey games. Paul gives one reason:

“Way to go, Paul.”

 

[shood77]

IMO the simplest explanation is, he went to that window because he saw that it was open, he wanted to look out at the pier, and he wanted to put Chloe out the window . He did all of these things. No accident, he simply wanted to do it and he did. Occam's razor. MOO

I’m a little late to this discussion, but this was my thought from the very beginning. Having been on a number of RCCL cruises before, the embarkation process takes a while. On our last cruise my daughter was seasick, so we never left the ship. The kids and I spent time on the enclosed pool deck watching people from the windows. NOT the open windows, because the visibility is just fine from the lower, closed windows

My theory from the beginning is that grandpa saw people walking on the pier, maybe in the process of boarding, and he thought “I have a cute grandkid. I’ll prop her in the window and we’ll wave at all the people.” He strikes me as one of those guys that needs attention, and cute kids are a good prop for that. If he was telling her that they were going to wave to all the people, that could explain the one-handed grip. And then she was gone...

 

[justice4allnow]

I’m a little late to this discussion, but this was my thought from the very beginning. Having been on a number of RCCL cruises before, the embarkation process takes a while. On our last cruise my daughter was seasick, so we never left the ship. The kids and I spent time on the enclosed pool deck watching people from the windows. NOT the open windows, because the visibility is just fine from the lower, closed windows

My theory from the beginning is that grandpa saw people walking on the pier, maybe in the process of boarding, and he thought “I have a cute grandkid. I’ll prop her in the window and we’ll wave at all the people.” He strikes me as one of those guys that needs attention, and cute kids are a good prop for that. If he was telling her that they were going to wave to all the people, that could explain the one-handed grip. And then she was gone...

This explanation actually makes sense, I could see this as having happened.

 

[MsMarple]

I hope Winkleman will have a very tough time trying to sue any cruise lines affected by the corona virus at this point. It angers me that he's looking to cash in on a pandemic. Hopefully he'll back off - we don't need that kind of crap right now. MOO.

Can Coronavirus Victims Sue for Injuries? | Law.com
Once coronavirus fades, global businesses are set to face a wave of lawsuits

 

[scruffydog]

I really think that "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" justice is needed here. Throw the horses *advertiser censored** out the same window. Tada-done. Save taxpayer money.

 

[neesaki]

I hope Winkleman will have a very tough time trying to sue any cruise lines affected by the corona virus at this point. It angers me that he's looking to cash in on a pandemic. Hopefully he'll back off - we don't need that kind of crap right now. MOO.

Can Coronavirus Victims Sue for Injuries? | Law.com
Once coronavirus fades, global businesses are set to face a wave of lawsuits

I agree. This catastrophe is no ones fault. Well, we could blame China... but for another time and place.

The cruise lines as far as I can tell have handled it the best they know how, as absolutely no one was prepared for this. There’s a learning curve with everything, this is no exception. But sadly there are always weasels out here looking to make a buck on someone else’s misfortune.

 

[neesaki]

I really think that "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" justice is needed here. Throw the horses *advertiser censored** out the same window. Tada-done. Save taxpayer money.

Lex talionis

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Lex talionis

Learned something new today. Thank you.

 

[Kindred]

NEW DOCUMENT UPATE:

Order on the Motion to Dismiss
Filed 3-16 8 Pages

Order Denying MTD 3-16.pdf

The motion to dismiss is denied. The case will proceed to the discovery stages

 

[In vino veritas]

NEW DOCUMENT UPATE:

Order on the Motion to Dismiss
Filed 3-16 8 Pages

Order Denying MTD 3-16.pdf

The motion to dismiss is denied. The case will proceed to the discovery stages

After reading the reasons for the courts decisions, I can only surmise that the enhanced video has not been “ officially” viewed/ introduced, as it would be considered part of the discovery phase.

I can only hope this is being allowed to proceed because the judge is adhering to the letter of the law. Once all the discovery is presented, I have to believe this case will ultimately be dismissed.

It is abhorrent to me that there would be any possibility the Wiegands could benefit financially from Chloe’s death for what is indisputably solely the result of SA’s actions.

I do believe the RCL will make enhancements to their safety protocol... likely in the form of signs or decals since “ prior notice” has been established. But, IMO, that should be the only result of this litigation n

 

[Pak31]

I'm still not convinced any of the video evidence definitively shows his head going out the window. So starting with the assumption he didn't realize the window was open is still the simplest explaination for why he placed her where he did.

I dont post on this thread much but wanted to respond. He definitely leans forward quite a bit and maybe his head didn’t go past the opening of the window it had to have been at least at the opening. He had to have known it was open. In the YouTube video tour the guy filming walks up to the open window and leans against the railing. He is able to stick his hand out and be right up against it. Watching this video I can tell it’s open. I’m sure being there is more evident. Also, SA goes to that window but it appeared CW was to his right, maybe at a few feet away. Instead of going to her location he brings her to his and lifts her up quite roughly. Nothing will convince me he didn’t know the window was open.

 

[Montrealaise]

I agree. This catastrophe is no ones fault. Well, we could blame China... but for another time and place.

The cruise lines as far as I can tell have handled it the best they know how, as absolutely no one was prepared for this. There’s a learning curve with everything, this is no exception. But sadly there are always weasels out here looking to make a buck on someone else’s misfortune.

Also those who are looking to make a buck on their own misfortune, like KW and AW.

 

[Kindred]

After reading the reasons for the courts decisions, I can only surmise that the enhanced video has not been “ officially” viewed/ introduced, as it would be considered part of the discovery phase.

I can only hope this is being allowed to proceed because the judge is adhering to the letter of the law. Once all the discovery is presented, I have to believe this case will ultimately be dismissed.

Snipped to address things separately and BBM

Whether or not the judge has seen it has nothing to do with this decision. The video and the judges' thoughts on it literally has nothing to do with this order. The only things under consideration in this are the amended MTD and the written responses it generated by both parties. The video has been submitted. It's highly likely the judge did see it the first time. We honestly can't say either way. Regardless he can't make any rulings on it yet.

It is abhorrent to me that there would be any possibility the Wiegands could benefit financially from Chloe’s death for what is indisputably solely the result of SA’s actions.

There's still absolutely no indication that they will. This case has eight entire months to go before it goes to trial. It has been said before that judges that don't like to throw out cases before the discovery. What I got from the order is the judge, like us, wants more information before making a final decision if this thing should make it to trial or not.

From page 5:

"This court finds the plaintiffs claims do not warrant dismissal under either interpretation of Keefe. Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant was put on notice of the dangerous condition by prior incidents, which raises a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal the evience of the defendant's liability"

To me, that reads as the court giving the Wiegands a chance while putting them on notice. You're going to make these arguments you better be able to make it stick. If they can't, there is nothing stopping a Summary Judgement canning this whole thing further on before it goes to a jury. He still needs convincing either way.

Be patient. Don't get frustrated over this. It's going to be a very slow battle. I'm convinced this way that SA is going to have to sit through a very uncomfortable deposition that will require him to have to answer just wtf he was doing/thinking. Don't think about how they might get money, think about all the info that is about to come out.

I do believe the RCL will make enhancements to their safety protocol... likely in the form of signs or decals since “ prior notice” has been established. But, IMO, that should be the only result of this litigation n

Probably something imprinted on the rails saying "warning: for their safety, do not place children on or past these rails"

 

[In vino veritas]

Snipped to address things separately and BBM

Whether or not the judge has seen it has nothing to do with this decision. The video and the judges' thoughts on it literally has nothing to do with this order. The only things under consideration in this are the amended MTD and the written responses it generated by both parties. The video has been submitted. It's highly likely the judge did see it the first time. We honestly can't say either way. Regardless he can't make any rulings on it yet.



There's still absolutely no indication that they will. This case has eight entire months to go before it goes to trial. It has been said before that judges that don't like to throw out cases before the discovery. What I got from the order is the judge, like us, wants more information before making a final decision if this thing should make it to trial or not.

From page 5:

"This court finds the plaintiffs claims do not warrant dismissal under either interpretation of Keefe. Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant was put on notice of the dangerous condition by prior incidents, which raises a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal the evience of the defendant's liability"

To me, that reads as the court giving the Wiegands a chance while putting them on notice. You're going to make these arguments you better be able to make it stick. If they can't, there is nothing stopping a Summary Judgement canning this whole thing further on before it goes to a jury. He still needs convincing either way.

Be patient. Don't get frustrated over this. It's going to be a very slow battle. I'm convinced this way that SA is going to have to sit through a very uncomfortable deposition that will require him to have to answer just wtf he was doing/thinking. Don't think about how they might get money, think about all the info that is about to come out.



Probably something imprinted on the rails saying "warning: for their safety, do not place children on or past these rails"

All very good points Kindred! And I concur.

Has there been any indication of a deadline/timeline for discovery to be presented? I know a trial date... if it comes to that.... has been set for late December of this year.

 

[Mommazz4]

After reading the reasons for the courts decisions, I can only surmise that the enhanced video has not been “ officially” viewed/ introduced, as it would be considered part of the discovery phase.

I can only hope this is being allowed to proceed because the judge is adhering to the letter of the law. Once all the discovery is presented, I have to believe this case will ultimately be dismissed.

It is abhorrent to me that there would be any possibility the Wiegands could benefit financially from Chloe’s death for what is indisputably solely the result of SA’s actions.

I do believe the RCL will make enhancements to their safety protocol... likely in the form of signs or decals since “ prior notice” has been established. But, IMO, that should be the only result of this litigation n

Could this be to delay proceedings until SA pleading guilty is finalized so the criminal culpability has been accepted by their family member responsible for Chloes death thus affecting the basis of their civil case.
Just a thought.

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

I dont post on this thread much but wanted to respond. He definitely leans forward quite a bit and maybe his head didn’t go past the opening of the window it had to have been at least at the opening. He had to have known it was open. In the YouTube video tour the guy filming walks up to the open window and leans against the railing. He is able to stick his hand out and be right up against it. Watching this video I can tell it’s open. I’m sure being there is more evident. Also, SA goes to that window but it appeared CW was to his right, maybe at a few feet away. Instead of going to her location he brings her to his and lifts her up quite roughly. Nothing will convince me he didn’t know the window was open.

The issue is not the virus itself, the issue is the response. How fast, how thorough, how it matched with WHO and CDC guidance.

 

[oviedo]

Activity on the civil docket: Jury trial is officially set for 12/21/20. There are several administrative orders added, nothing really of any interest here. The motion to dismiss is still under consideration.

Thank you for all the updates !