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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lilibet said:
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.
Click to expand...
^^^The other poster was referencing a different member and not myself ; they explained this.

Has LE ruled anything out ?
If the PR LE rule this an accident then that's all it was.
I have no problem with that.


It looked like case this was a non-issue and then what happened ?
Why charge him now ?
It seemed like SA would've been charged as soon as the video was viewed....and if just an unfortunate accident, why not leave the family (incl. SA) alone ?
What do you think ?
 
What Did CBS Panelists Say? Does It Matter?
MyBelle said:
....I'm curious what CBS coverage that was on because this national CBS story from today makes no mention of police and none of the news panel agrees that it is a crime. Thanks!
Grandfather charged in death of granddaughter who fell from cruise ship
Click to expand...
@MyBelle :) sbm and Others
"....CBS story from today makes no mention of police and none of the news panel agrees that it is a crime...."
Grandfather charged in death of granddaughter who fell from cruise ship
Is ^ post referring to ^ link?
If so, pls note timestamps at which each panelist says/agrees G'pa's action(s) is not a crime.

Have any/all of these four seen cruiseline's vid? Are/were any/all of these four attorneys?
If no to these two questions, I'd be inclined to give their opinions the same weight and credibility as a 'man on the street' interview. Others might give them more. Maybe what they say is indicative of what a jury may think, before seeing and hearing the vid and other evidence. jmo

Here's what I saw. Gayle's intro, then ~ a couple min of Jerrika(?) delivering body of story.
Starting ~ 2 min:50 sec's, Gayle/Red Dress says ~ Seems like a tragic accident.
Then Purple Tie says ~ I don't see why they would indict unless the fam was for it.
Then Jerrika(?)/Black Dress/Plaid Skirt says ~ It's negligent homicide, so not intentional. Have to see how it plays out.
Striped Tie says ~ $80,000 bond is not nothing. In pix you see glass, glass, glass, open window, glass, glass, glass.
Are these ^ comments saying all four said - no crime?
I'm interpreting these comments as sympathetic to all in the family.
Not seeing or hearing four panelists as saying - no crime. Maybe I missed/misinterp'ed something. I have before and probably will again. No, undoubtedly will again.
 
LietKynes said:
^^^The other poster was referencing a different member and not myself ; they explained this.

Has LE ruled anything out ?
If the PR LE rule this an accident then that's all it was.
I have no problem with that.


It looked like case this was a non-issue and then what happened ?
Why charge him now ?
It seemed like SA would've been charged as soon as the video was viewed....and if just an unfortunate accident, why not leave the family (incl. SA) alone ?
What do you think ?
Click to expand...

Yes sorry...I saw that the mistaken identity was cleared up. :) But my comment still stands for the other poster.

I don’t think this case was ever a “non issue.” Chloe is the victim and it’s LE’s responsibility to represent her interests and determine what happened. I think LE no doubt conducted a thorough investigation and interviewed a lot of people, in addition to watching the video frame-by-frame. They probably also retrieved records of what SA had to drink, if anything, as well as medical records and other info we haven’t even guessed. So it doesn’t strike me as odd that it took about three months to present the case to the DA who then filed charges. It seems clear that there must have been enough evidence to charge negligent homicide and that it couldn’t be written off as an unfortunate accident. I doubt LE wanted to charge a distraught grandfather, but Chloe is the victim and LE is working on her behalf only.
 
MsFacetious said:
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.
Click to expand...

The PR Port Authority has jurisdiction of the port but the incident happened on the U.S. ship. George Smith fell from a RC ship which is why the FBI was called in. Chloe fell from a RC ship. The crimes allegedly occurred on the ships. Both victims were U.S. citizens. Defendant is a U.S. citizen.

Crimes Against Americans on Cruise Ships
 
Lilibet said:
I don’t think this case was ever a “non issue.” Chloe is the victim and it’s LE’s responsibility to represent her interests and determine what happened. I think LE no doubt conducted a thorough investigation and interviewed a lot of people, in addition to watching the video frame-by-frame. They probably also retrieved records of what SA had to drink, if anything, as well as medical records and other info we haven’t even guessed. So it doesn’t strike me as odd that it took about three months to present the case to the DA who then filed charges. It seems clear that there must have been enough evidence to charge negligent homicide and that it couldn’t be written off as an unfortunate accident. I doubt LE wanted to charge a distraught grandfather, but Chloe is the victim and LE is working on her behalf only.
Click to expand...
LBM
I think you put that very well.

When I said "non-issue" I hope it wasn't taken as a slight to Chloe's memory, or 'lessening' (is that the right term?) of the tragedy.
My meaning was that everything seemed to go quiet and I thought RCC and PR LE and whomever else was involved in Chloe's investigation had decided this was an unfortunate accident and nothing more.
So no charges ?

Am thinking out loud and not always succinctly.

But if a person is speeding even without alcohol/drugs being involved --and hits and kills someone; there'd be a thorough investigation.
So in that light....

That last part of your post made me tear up : "... but Chloe is the victim and LE is working on her behalf only"
Yes -- she was just barely starting her life, poor baby ! :(
 
SaguaroSpirit said:
My opinion may be unpopular, I don't really care. I just don't see how anyone could be so accidentally careless with someone that they truly loved and cared about. It was just too many stupid "mistakes" to try and forgive.
Click to expand...
Since SA was charged .. he is sleuthable.
Just putting that out there.
The fam. lawyer says SA's boss speaks well of him.
But what about the other family members ? Are they on speaking terms or is there some cold silence ?
Was there any mistakes in SA's past where fam. members didn't like nor trust him ?
The lawyer's opinion is based on recent acquaintance I believe. As in, not a long time family friend from many years back. So MW may not know SA all that well.
 
LietKynes said:
When I said "non-issue" I hope it wasn't taken as a slight to Chloe's memory, or 'lessening' (is that the right term?) of the tragedy.
My meaning was that everything seemed to go quiet and I thought RCC and PR LE and whomever else was involved in Chloe's investigation had decided this was an unfortunate accident and nothing more.
So no charges ?
Click to expand...

I took it exactly as you just stated it, so I didn’t think it was a slight to Chloe’s memory at all. :) It did go quiet and I checked on it just the other day and there was nothing. I too wondered if it had just been ruled an accident. But I’ve also seen investigations take much longer than we WSers think they should take...in silence...so we think LE isn’t viewing it as a crime...and then BAM there’s an arrest. We discover that LE has been quietly building a case all along. It happens all the time!
 
Safeguard said:
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).
Click to expand...
A cruise ship is a floating hotel which markets to families. I've not stayed in any hotel that has windows that open on the 11th floor. Considering there is a wide open play area plus adult pools, nobody is forced to sit in the "stuffy" area next to the child's zone. Guests can move to an area away from kids if they don't want to put the children's safety ahead of their own selfish selves.

I saw photos of the area with crime scene tape after this incident happened. They were in the outside area shaded by the overhead deck, right next to the H2O pool play area.

JMO
Colourful Water Fountains In H2o Zone Pool Area On Deck 11 Freedom Of The Seas Cruise Ship Royal Caribbean International Cruise Line High-Res Stock Photo - Getty Images
 
they'll get you said:
I think Royal Caribbean is the winner.
I imagine the family can’t sue them now because it appears to be grandpa’s fault if he’s been charged.

Ya just can’t help stupid.
Click to expand...
Of course the parents can sue. They have not been charged with a crime and the lawsuit will be filed in the U.S., not Puerto Rico.

JMO
 
SaguaroSpirit said:
My opinion may be unpopular, I don't really care. I just don't see how anyone could be so accidentally careless with someone that they truly loved and cared about. It was just too many stupid "mistakes" to try and forgive.
Click to expand...

It's not just an "unpopular" opinion. There is absolutely NO evidence of cold blooded murder anywhere in the whole scenario. Just being unable to imagine, how you yourself, could ever do something so tragically short sighted, does not mean that is not what happened here.

This is incomprehensible and beyond irresponsible to many, that still doesn't make it murder. There is no motive, nor any evidence at all that points to a murder. imo

There is plenty of evidence that he loved this child.
 
Last edited:
LE Silence, Timing of Charges
LietKynes said:
...It looked like case this was a non-issue and then what happened ? Why charge him now ? It seemed like SA would've been charged as soon as the video was viewed....
Click to expand...
@LietKynes :) sbm. and Others

"It looked like case this was a non-issue..."
Who said? LE silence of 3 or 4 months does not auto-translate into No Criminal Case/Charges Ever.
It translates into no crim charges ATM, w possibiity of crim charges at any time until statute of limitations expires. A couple yrs. or longer for some crimes

"...and then what happened?"
LE amassed sufficient evd; prosecutors reviewed and agreed.

"Why charge him now?" Why not as soon as vid was viewed?
(1) Because LE had to investigate and prosecutors staff had to review and start prepping for motion hearings, for trial, etc. They were not able to drop/ignore all their other cases, and go full tilt boogie on this case.
Some LE & prosecutors say - the investigation work and pre-trial prep is like a sculptor starting w a block of marble the size of a SUV, then carving, shaping, sculpting most, 95% of it away, throwing away the chunks, shards, rubble, dust, until the finished product is the size of a shoebox. Lots of LE investigation time is locating docs, interviewing witnesses, analyzing data, ruling out some info & theories for prosecutor to present, some to use. Prosecutors do not use/present 100% of it at trial. Pre-trial or at trial, defense team may not ask/question/challenge 95% of those items. Like the debris from the sculpture, But of all the 'scrap' info, prosecutors cannot predict which 5% the defense team will raise/challenge, so have to be prepared to respond to 100%.
(2) Because this is real life, not TV or movies. No snark, no sarc. jmo.

And ditto what @Lilibet posted.
 
MyBelle said:
A cruise ship is a floating hotel which markets to families. I've not stayed in any hotel that has windows that open on the 11th floor. Considering there is a wide open play area plus adult pools, nobody is forced to sit in the "stuffy" area next to the child's zone. Guests can move to an area away from kids if they don't want to put the children's safety ahead of their own selfish selves.

I saw photos of the area with crime scene tape after this incident happened. They were in the outside area shaded by the overhead deck, right next to the H2O pool play area.

JMO
Colourful Water Fountains In H2o Zone Pool Area On Deck 11 Freedom Of The Seas Cruise Ship Royal Caribbean International Cruise Line High-Res Stock Photo - Getty Images
Click to expand...
Its a walking path, where those windows are. In any case, I prefer the windows be operational for fresh air and people be responsible for their kids. Maybe too much to expect from some people I guess.
 
Last edited:
Lilibet said:
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.
Click to expand...
Almost immediately after this tragedy happened, Puerto Rico's LE told the foreign press that murder had not been ruled out. In fact, it became the lead in the foreign media reports. The parents were prudent to act swiftly to retain legal counsel.

Seat belt violations don't imperil the safety of anyone but the person who fails to buckle up for whatever reason. That's their choice. Has nothing to do with the man's attention to safety of his grandchildren. In the following story, a photo shows the grandparents with Chloe at a Notre Dame game. The child is wearing ear protection.

JMO

Cops 'won't rule out murder' after toddler dropped from cruise ship window

HUNT FOR ANSWERS
Cops ‘won’t rule out murder’ after tragic toddler dropped 150ft from Royal Caribbean ship window but family blame liner
POLICE investigating the death of a toddler who fell 150 feet from the window of a Royal Caribbean cruise ship say they won't rule out murder.


Eighteen-month-old Chloe Wiegand, from Indiana, plummeted 11 floors from the Freedom of the Seas, reportedly slamming into concrete below while the vessel was docked in San Juan, Puerto Rico.
 
Safeguard said:
Its a walking path, where those windows are. In any case, I prefer the windows be operational for fresh air and people be responsible for their kids. Maybe to much to expect from some people I guess.
Click to expand...

I agree. It also appears from the picture MyBelle posted that the pool area is at a higher level than the walkway by the windows. Also, there are tables by the windows to enjoy a drink and the view. So the windows are not immediately adjoining and accessible to the pool area.

No place on earth can be made perfectly safe for children. When reasonable safety precautions are in place, like a bar in front of a high window in this case, parental common sense has to be part of the equation. The cruise line isn’t responsible for supervising kids except perhaps in designated play areas. In this case, it was the grandfather’s job to keep Chloe safe and he exhibited zero sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 60 more.
Total: 1,787 (members: 61, guests: 1,726)

Online statistics

Members online
61
Guests online
1,726
Total visitors
1,787
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,342
Messages
18,139,338
Members
231,352
Latest member
8xbet81bet
Back
Top