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

[MyBelle]

There is, as of yet ZERO evidence or testimony that he "dangled" this baby out of the window. I seriously feel that is not the case. Why insist on calling it "The Dangling death" (bolded, enlarged and colored even!), when it's much more likely he tried to let the kid look out at the view and lost his grip? Toddlers often lurch forward suddenly and I totally see that as more plausible than Grampa impersonating Micheal Jackson frankly. All just my .2

If there was any evidence at all that the baby was dangled, I think charges would have been swift and far more serious than a misdemeanor.

I've seen no evidence that Grandpa knew the window was even open. I think the handrail was there for anyone to grab onto in case the ship moved suddenly. ITA about toddlers suddenly lurching. They love to bounce.

JMO

 

[LietKynes]

There is, as of yet ZERO evidence or testimony that he "dangled" this baby out of the window. I seriously feel that is not the case. Why insist on calling it "The Dangling death" (bolded, enlarged and colored even!), when it's much more likely he tried to let the kid look out at the view and lost his grip? Toddlers often lurch forward suddenly and I totally see that as more plausible than Grampa impersonating Micheal Jackson frankly. All just my .2

This is how the cruise line's staff first reported it when the incident was reported.
So I am going to go with their testimony.
The ship's staff said it appeared from their viewpoint that he held her out and dangled her out the open window.
The English-translated article says he held her "through" the window.
Almost makes this sound even worse.
What was S.A thinking ?
Later the account was changed to 'allowing her to sit on the rail and bang on the glass'.
As if that made it better.
Except in the photos of the railing, it's back a bit from the windows and no where near the glass window she fell from.

 

[LietKynes]

Horrendously bad judgment. Would be my guess.

Or looking for money.
Large financial settlements are nothing new and a big 'carrot' on a stick to those wanting it.
What is the point of suing grandpa ? He can't be that wealthy.

 

[LietKynes]

But even if he did that, why? Why would any responsible adult do that? I mean, would you ? I know I wouldn't let any small child near a high window like that. What was he thinking? I can't even imagine, and am totally and completely at a loss. So, please, please, if someone could please explain that to me, I am waiting. TIA

LBM
That's assuming he is a responsible person.
His FB posts are vanishing.
2nd l. bolding : See post # 232.
My opinion as always.

 

[MyBelle]

I don’t know for certain but imagine it’s because in this instance the ship was in port and not open sea

The ship was in port but the death took place on the U.S. ship, not on PR soil. The FBI does have offices in Puerto Rico. So does the U.S. attorney. I'm not sure that the Puerto Rico judicial system has the same rights protections as the U.S.

JMO

 

[Safeguard]

LBM
The first article when this story broke said that the family hired a lawyer well within 24 hours of the fall.
Who does that ?
Doing so made the public look askance at the parents as well.
And then those GMA interviews. Smh.

bbm
I have always viewed that move as a preemptive strike. Someone was going to be held responsible. If they could place the blame on the cruise line, then Grampa gets a pass. ( possibly). But they had to move fast before charges were brought. imo.

 

[MyBelle]

This is how the cruise line's staff first reported it when the incident was reported.
So I am going to go with their testimony.
The ship's staff said it appeared from their viewpoint that he held her out and dangled her out the open window.
The English-translated article says he held her "through" the window.
Almost makes this sound even worse.
What was S.A thinking ?
Later the account was changed to 'allowing her to sit on the rail and bang on the glass'.
As if that made it better.
Except in the photos of the railing, it's back a bit from the windows and no where near the glass window she fell from.

I take comments by the ship's staff with a grain of salt. Of course they would blame the guest rather than admit liability. They want to keep their jobs.

JMO

 

[Safeguard]

Or looking for money.
Large financial settlements are nothing new and a big 'carrot' on a stick to those wanting it.
What is the point of suing grandpa ? He can't be that wealthy.

You have made it clear you feel he deliberately murdered this baby. The only reason they sued was to make someone besides grandpa guilty, so he wouldn't be charged. I see no evidence that the child was murdered. These people did not need money. And historically there is no evidence of malicious behavior. This death was a lose/lose horror for everyone involved jmo.

 

[LietKynes]

You have made it clear you feel he deliberately murdered this baby. The only reason they sued was to make someone besides grandpa guilty, so he wouldn't be charged. I see no evidence that the child was murdered. These people did not need money. And historically there is no evidence of malicious behavior. This death was a lose/lose horror for everyone involved jmo.

LBM

No I have not said that, nor did I 'make it clear'.
We can agree to disagree and that's fine..apologies if I misspoke.
So all is good.

The motive is there but that doesn't mean he wanted a settlement badly enough to play a game (As the lawyer put it) with deadly consequences.
We do not know their financial status, unless someone else does.
A settlement from the RCC can be in the 10's of millions or more.
That may not be the case at all here.

I seriously would want to view any video and have clear answers.
Esp. if I was elsewhere when my baby perished.

 

[Safeguard]

If there was any evidence at all that the baby was dangled, I think charges would have been swift and far more serious than a misdemeanor.

I've seen no evidence that Grandpa knew the window was even open. I think the handrail was there for anyone to grab onto in case the ship moved suddenly. ITA about toddlers suddenly lurching. They love to bounce.

JMO

Yes, they love to bounce. Poor little girl. She's almost becoming an afterthought in this whole mess...

I never and don't believe that he didn't know the window was open, the smell alone, the breeze, tint... yeah. I think he was letting her look outside for sure. imo ~sigh~

 

[LietKynes]

bbm
I have always viewed that move as a preemptive strike. Someone was going to be held responsible. If they could place the blame on the cruise line, then Grampa gets a pass. ( possibly). But they had to move fast before charges were brought. imo.

Curious if the parents feel that SA is innocent ?
And the ship is truly at fault ?
And they seem to be much more forgiving than most. Not that that's a bad quality to have.

 

[LvsAMystry]

The ship was in port but the death took place on the U.S. ship, not on PR soil. The FBI does have offices in Puerto Rico. So does the U.S. attorney. I'm not sure that the Puerto Rico judicial system has the same rights protections as the U.S.

JMO

There must be a reason then, I just don’t know it. I’m guessing because it’s not technically a foreign port. I know it does depend on location of ship at time, not simply on ship per se.

 

[MsFacetious]

I don’t know for certain but imagine it’s because in this instance the ship was in port and not open sea

I think this is correct. When a death occurs ON the ship, or in the ocean that doesn't fall under a state or territory jurisdiction. Like Kristy Manzanares, or George Smith... so the FBI takes over.

In this case Chloe fell 150 feet from the ship in the San Juan port.
Chloe landed on the concrete in the San Juan port.
Chloe died when she hit the ground, she did not die on the ship.
Chloe was transported to San Juan facilities.
There really wasn't a gray area here, no reason to call in the FBI.

 

[Safeguard]

LBM

No I have not said that, nor did I 'make it clear'.
We can agree to disagree and that's fine....don't put words in other poster's mouths that they didn't specify.
So all is good.

The motive is there but that doesn't mean he wanted a settlement badly enough to play a game (As the lawyer put it) with deadly consequences.
We do not know their financial status, unless someone else does.
A settlement from the RCC can be in the 10's of millions or more.

Please accept my apology. You were not the poster I was referring to! I thought it was you because:

Or looking for money.
Large financial settlements are nothing new and a big 'carrot' on a stick to those wanting it.

You do seem to feel the child was killed for money. Same thing no?

But the post I was remembering, where the poster outright said it was "no accident" was:

I never thought it was an accident. JMOO!!!!

 

[MyBelle]

Yes, they love to bounce. Poor little girl. She's almost becoming an afterthought in this whole mess...

I never and don't believe that he didn't know the window was open, the smell alone, the breeze, tint... yeah. I think he was letting her look outside for sure. imo ~sigh~

While he may have been letting her look out the window, I think his attention and eyes were focused on the play area which was open air and in the opposite direction. There were older siblings and it has never been mentioned where they were when the accident happened. If I'm with my grand kids on the 11th floor of a hotel, I sure don't expect any windows to be operational.

JMO

 

[LietKynes]

I think this is correct. When a death occurs ON the ship, or in the ocean that doesn't fall under a state or territory jurisdiction. Like Kristy Manzanares, or George Smith so the FBI takes over.

In this case Chloe fell 150 feet from the ship in the San Juan port.
Chloe landed on the concrete in the San Juan port.
Chloe died when she hit the ground, she did not die on the ship.
Chloe was transported to San Juan facilities.
There really wasn't a gray area here, no reason to call in the FBI.

LBM

They weren't called in, correct ?
Is SA in PR right now ?
Or if in IN, can he be extradited ?
Although I'm assuming with the smaller bail amount, he's most likely free anyway.

Not like he's a danger to the public unless he's out driving while under the influence and/or speeding.
This is not to say such crimes are negligible.
He has a speeding & reckless driving issue.
Imo.

 

[LietKynes]

Please accept my apology. You were not the poster I was referring to! I thought it was you because:
You do seem to feel the child was killed for money. Same thing no?

But the post I was remembering, where the poster outright said it was "no accident" was:

No problem at all.

I think the lawyer and sadly one of the parents at least should see the video. Maybe with the fatal moment edited out ?
I would want to if it happened to my child.
I would have to know.

Moving on....
So, there are several options to pursue for the Wiegands' ; imo.
Drop the lawsuit , have SA admit some culpability, install heavy screens over all windows and in front of the railings, settle this privately and without any media and a non-disclosure agreement about what was discussed.

I struggle to see if the cruise line has any culpability. Tried to think how anything could've been done differently and fail to think of anything other than windows that can't be opened and no railings or access around the outside-- with no way to see the ocean ; either on deck or around the ships' edges/walkways.

 

[MsFacetious]

Chloe only has one older sibling.
Grandpa was in PR, apparently has bailed out.
I haven't seen whether he is required to stay in PR.
Next court date is November 20.

 

[Safeguard]

While he may have been letting her look out the window, I think his attention and eyes were focused on the play area which was open air and in the opposite direction. There were older siblings and it has never been mentioned where they were when the accident happened. If I'm with my grand kids on the 11th floor of a hotel, I sure don't expect any windows to be operational.

JMO

I recall reading many cruise forum members saying those windows are operational by passengers due to how hot and suffocatingly muggy that deck can become. I have read quite a few people who have traveled on that very same ship, state that it is not easily accessible to children, and the area they were in is not a "play area". Seems quite like the windows were made to open, for passenger comfort, hense the safety railing. ( which you won't find on the 11 floor of any Hotel).

 

[Lilibet]

You have made it clear you feel he deliberately murdered this baby. The only reason they sued was to make someone besides grandpa guilty, so he wouldn't be charged. I see no evidence that the child was murdered. These people did not need money. And historically there is no evidence of malicious behavior. This death was a lose/lose horror for everyone involved jmo.

Exactly. This doesn’t have to be a nefarious murder scheme to explain the lawsuit. Plenty of people sue to deflect blame off themselves or even because they sincerely believe someone else was at fault. SA has been charged with negligent homicide, not murder, so IMO a murder theory should not even be part of the conversation here.

We have a man with a 23 year history of multiple seat belt and speeding violations. He clearly has no respect for the safety of other people or the law. Unfortunately, this careless man was allowed to have responsibility for Chloe’s safety. He was an accident waiting to happen even without alcohol, and this heartbreaking tragedy was the result.