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

[TDoc72]

There was tabled seating near those cruise line windows. What if an older child decided to stand on a table or chair to get a better view out the window because the railing blocked his view? There should be no open windows accessible to children on a cruise ship just as there should be no live gators lurking in the water next to a children's beach. To me, it is common sense.

JMO

snipped by me

If that happened to an older child, it still wouldn’t be the cruise lines’ fault IMO. Depending on what age is older, it’s either the parent’s or guardian’s responsibility or a dumbass teenager’s fault.

The top of the boat is open and I’m sure there are other windows that open on other decks and on other ships. We do not have children falling out of ship windows every day.

The window was only accessible to Chloe because her grandfather made it accessible to her. JMO

 

[al66pine]

How many inches apart? Could Chloe Have Climbed off Rail onto/thru Window?

I screenshot this from the video of Freedom posted upthread - this May shed light in your positioning questions which IMO are well thought out - it didn’t occur to me that his back could be to the window and still seat the baby on the railing so she either fell out facing the window or with her back to it depending on how he held her - the video from the ship will likely show it since we know they have it yet the parents haven’t viewed it for themselves based on the original MSM stories

. @oviedo Thx for your post and the pic too.
I'm trying to figure out how far away the outside edge of the rail is from window frame or glass.
I'm kinda/sorta thinking rail placement is designed to prevent most/all chance of adults defenestrating and preventing adults from inadvertently dropping toddlers & young children. But still giving adult passengers a place to lean on elbows and orient head and shoulders toward the window. Of course, there's always the X factor, like Spiderman and any semi-athletic ppl who could vault over rail, and dive thru that size window, if they were so inclined.

W this line of thinking, distance between rail and window must be small/short enough to prevent or at least discourage adult pax from standing between rail & window. So, how many inches? 8? 12? 15?
Or maybe there's another reason for rail placement?

Suppose a toddler on rail was really intent on getting to window.
Sitting on rail and facing window, could she reach her feet straight out and put instep of her feet to the window frame? Then could she leverage herself up to stand on window? She would need to grasp something to help get upper body to window. Even if rail and bottom of window frame were at same height, seems darned unlikely imo, that she or any toddler could magically lever self into window and then drop from there. Could a toddler her size putting legs out toward window reach them out far enough so that the back of knee would reach the window frame? That is, suppose, toddler's upper legs were longer than distance from rail to window.

How much upper body strength & arm strength would it take to pull and leverage self up, to stand in window? How quickly could it be done? In such a short time that G'father could not even notice?

I'm having trouble imagining a toddler being able to climb/jump/leap/fly from rail to window, unless the rail is only a few inches from window, and even then, still not likely imo.
In vids and IRL, I've seen toddlers' climbing feats, going up kitchen drawers they've pulled open, getting onto counters, to open top/wall cabinets for treats. But that does not involve a longish horizontal stretch like this shipboard climb would entail.

Seems imo, if G'father had rested toddler on rail that he maintained a sufficiently firm grasp on Chloe. jmo, could be wrong.

 

[squareandrabbet]

If this happened in a wall where there's wood panels or wainscoting, and a person leaning on it fell through to the other side---maybe that could be construed as a 'hidden hole' ?

This made me think of the Scooby Doo kids discovering a secret passage hidden behind the library bookshelves; which I agree is not remotely the same thing at all.

 

[Safeguard]

<modsnip - off topic>
Never before, in the history of cruises has a child fallen/been dropped from a window. imo that's a darn good safety record as far as those windows go.

I expect they will lose the civil suit.

 

[Safeguard]

How many inches apart? Could Chloe Have Climbed off Rail onto/thru Window?
. @oviedo Thx for your post and the pic too.
I'm trying to figure out how far away the outside edge of the rail is from window frame or glass.
I'm kinda/sorta thinking rail placement is designed to prevent most/all chance of adults defenestrating and preventing adults from inadvertently dropping toddlers & young children. But still giving adult passengers a place to lean on elbows and orient head and shoulders toward the window. Of course, there's always the X factor, like Spiderman and any semi-athletic ppl who could vault over rail, and dive thru that size window, if they were so inclined.

W this line of thinking, distance between rail and window must be small/short enough to prevent or at least discourage adult pax from standing between rail & window. So, how many inches? 8? 12? 15?
Or maybe there's another reason for rail placement?

Suppose a toddler on rail was really intent on getting to window.
Sitting on rail and facing window, could she reach her feet straight out and put instep of her feet to the window frame? Then could she leverage herself up to stand on window? She would need to grasp something to help get upper body to window. Even if rail and bottom of window frame were at same height, seems darned unlikely imo, that she or any toddler could magically lever self into window and then drop from there. Could a toddler her size putting legs out toward window reach them out far enough so that the back of knee would reach the window frame? That is, suppose, toddler's upper legs were longer than distance from rail to window.

How much upper body strength & arm strength would it take to pull and leverage self up, to stand in window? How quickly could it be done? In such a short time that G'father could not even notice?

I'm having trouble imagining a toddler being able to climb/jump/leap/fly from rail to window, unless the rail is only a few inches from window, and even then, still not likely imo.
In vids and IRL, I've seen toddlers' climbing feats, going up kitchen drawers they've pulled open, getting onto counters, to open top/wall cabinets for treats. But that does not involve a longish horizontal stretch like this shipboard climb would entail.

Seems imo, if G'father had rested toddler on rail that he maintained a sufficiently firm grasp on Chloe. jmo, could be wrong.

al66pine, loving your posts tonight! Insightful (and hilariously witty! ) Great job!

 

[katydid23]

My opinion about this case is really focused on the window child safety issue because of a tragedy...snip...
The civil case isn't all that complicated. Toddlers don't just bang on windows. They also like to look through windows. I think Chloe was seated on the railing very close to her grandfather with his arm around her waist. The railing would be bearing her weight rather than her grandfather's hand/arm/shoulder/back.

Toddlers don't wiggle a lot when they are fascinated at looking at something but if they are standing on the floor, they will wander away. I believe Grandpa was standing in order to see the family's other children in the water play area and whatever suddenly happened, Grandpa couldn't react in time.

I do believe it is a valid safety issue and is no different than the tragedy that killed Lane Graves at Disney World. Just because something hasn't happened before doesn't mean it won't happen again. A family from Nebraska isn't going to expect live alligators to be lurking near the man-made beach where their little boy is playing in the sand. Social media vilified those parents. It was ridiculous.

There was tabled seating near those cruise line windows. What if an older child decided to stand on a table or chair to get a better view out the window because the railing blocked his view? There should be no open windows accessible to children on a cruise ship just as there should be no live gators lurking in the water next to a children's beach. To me, it is common sense.

JMO

If you are correct, and that baby was 'seated on the railing' ---then that man should go to jail. That would be incredibly dangerous and irresponsible if he placed a baby, or even an older child, way tup here, on a small narrow piece of wood, with an open window, so high above a concrete floor.

Grandpa was not watching other children---his job was to watch his grandbaby. And keep her safe.
Putting her up in that window was a very bad decision.

 

[katydid23]

No one has suggested the windowed area is a play area but it is very obviously adjacent to it and within sight. It is a shaded area for adults who don't want to be in the sun but who want to be able to see their children. Do the bars not serve non-alcohol beverages?
JMO

All bars serve non-alcohol beverages. That doesn't make them children play areas.

 

[MyBelle]

If you are correct, and that baby was 'seated on the railing' ---then that man should go to jail. That would be incredibly dangerous and irresponsible if he placed a baby, or even an older child, way tup here, on a small narrow piece of wood, with an open window, so high above a concrete floor.

Grandpa was not watching other children---his job was to watch his grandbaby. And keep her safe.
Putting her up in that window was a very bad decision.

That's your opinion. If there was a baby seated on the railing--and absolutely no warning posted about the railing or the windows--then that is the fault of the business owner, not the family of the child.

There are ample laws in place about attractive nuisances. A cruise line is not exempt from following the law.

JMO

 

[Safeguard]

That's your opinion. If there was a baby seated on the railing--and absolutely no warning posted about the railing or the windows--then that is the fault of the business owner, not the family of the child.

There are ample laws in place about attractive nuisances. A cruise line is not exempt from following the law.

JMO

Baby could not have fallen out the window from a seated position on the safety rail. Most she could have done is fallen on the floor.

Please see al66pine's excellent post for reference:

How many inches apart? Could Chloe Have Climbed off Rail onto/thru Window?
. @oviedo Thx for your post and the pic too.
I'm trying to figure out how far away the outside edge of the rail is from window frame or glass.
I'm kinda/sorta thinking rail placement is designed to prevent most/all chance of adults defenestrating and preventing adults from inadvertently dropping toddlers & young children. But still giving adult passengers a place to lean on elbows and orient head and shoulders toward the window. Of course, there's always the X factor, like Spiderman and any semi-athletic ppl who could vault over rail, and dive thru that size window, if they were so inclined.

W this line of thinking, distance between rail and window must be small/short enough to prevent or at least discourage adult pax from standing between rail & window. So, how many inches? 8? 12? 15?
Or maybe there's another reason for rail placement?

Suppose a toddler on rail was really intent on getting to window.
Sitting on rail and facing window, could she reach her feet straight out and put instep of her feet to the window frame? Then could she leverage herself up to stand on window? She would need to grasp something to help get upper body to window. Even if rail and bottom of window frame were at same height, seems darned unlikely imo, that she or any toddler could magically lever self into window and then drop from there. Could a toddler her size putting legs out toward window reach them out far enough so that the back of knee would reach the window frame? That is, suppose, toddler's upper legs were longer than distance from rail to window.

How much upper body strength & arm strength would it take to pull and leverage self up, to stand in window? How quickly could it be done? In such a short time that G'father could not even notice?

I'm having trouble imagining a toddler being able to climb/jump/leap/fly from rail to window, unless the rail is only a few inches from window, and even then, still not likely imo.
In vids and IRL, I've seen toddlers' climbing feats, going up kitchen drawers they've pulled open, getting onto counters, to open top/wall cabinets for treats. But that does not involve a longish horizontal stretch like this shipboard climb would entail.

Seems imo, if G'father had rested toddler on rail that he maintained a sufficiently firm grasp on Chloe. jmo, could be wrong.

 

[al66pine]

G'father & Chloe & Positions on Rail? v. 2.0
Since earlier post suggested/concluded G'father put Chloe on the rail, I asked about how he planned/tried to keep her there (prevent her from falling). Now repeating, further below, a question which went unanswered, and asking some new questions.

.... I think Chloe was seated on the railing very close to her grandfather with his arm around her waist. The railing would be bearing her weight rather than her grandfather's hand/arm/shoulder/back.
Toddlers don't wiggle a lot when they are fascinated at looking at something but if they are standing on the floor, they will wander away. ...whatever suddenly happened, Grandpa couldn't react in time....

@MyBelle bbm sbm

Q: If she was sitting on the rail, 'close to G'father' w his arm around her waist, how did he try to keep her from falling off the rail?
3a. Did he put his arm between her waist and ship interior, his hand curling around to grasp waist?
If so, w his arm positioned that way, could his hand actually curl backwards to grasp waist to prevent her from falling off rail?
3b. Did he put his arm between her waist and window side, his hand curling around to grasp waist?
If so, Chloe could bang on window(s) only by leaning outward toward the window/exterior (unless she had chimpanzee-length arms which I did not notice), so some/most/all her body weight would bear down on G'father's arm.
A: 3a__ or 3b___ Or other ___?

"Toddlers don't wiggle a lot when they are fascinated at looking at something but if they are standing on the floor, they will wander away."
Q: Generally agreeing to above thought, because frequently a toddler on floor has view of practically nothing, just walls and adult knees, shoes, & shins. But in this case, If Chloe had been standing on floor and looking out, she would have seen virtually the same thing that she would have seen if held on G'father's hip-carry, from G'father's arms, from G'father's holding her on rail.
So if she had been standing on the floor, w those same views, why would she wander away?

Q: "...whatever suddenly happened, Grandpa couldn't react in time..."
What could have happened leaving G'father insufficient time to react?

All jmo.

 

[MyBelle]

snipped by me

If that happened to an older child, it still wouldn’t be the cruise lines’ fault IMO. Depending on what age is older, it’s either the parent’s or guardian’s responsibility or a dumbass teenager’s fault.

The top of the boat is open and I’m sure there are other windows that open on other decks and on other ships. We do not have children falling out of ship windows every day.

The window was only accessible to Chloe because her grandfather made it accessible to her. JMO

G'father & Chloe & Positions on Rail? v. 2.0
Since earlier post suggested/concluded G'father put Chloe on the rail, I asked about how he planned/tried to keep her there (prevent her from falling). Now repeating, further below, a question which went unanswered, and asking some new questions.
@MyBelle bbm sbm

Q: If she was sitting on the rail, 'close to G'father' w his arm around her waist, how did he try to keep her from falling off the rail?
3a. Did he put his arm between her waist and ship interior, his hand curling around to grasp waist?
If so, w his arm positioned that way, could his hand actually curl backwards to grasp waist to prevent her from falling off rail?
3b. Did he put his arm between her waist and window side, his hand curling around to grasp waist?
If so, Chloe could bang on window(s) only by leaning outward toward the window/exterior (unless she had chimpanzee-length arms which I did not notice), so some/most/all her body weight would bear down on G'father's arm.
A: 3a__ or 3b___ Or other ___?

"Toddlers don't wiggle a lot when they are fascinated at looking at something but if they are standing on the floor, they will wander away."
Q: Generally agreeing to above thought, because frequently a toddler on floor has view of practically nothing, just walls and adult knees, shoes, & shins. But in this case, If Chloe had been standing on floor and looking out, she would have seen virtually the same thing that she would have seen if held on G'father's hip-carry, from G'father's arms, from G'father's holding her on rail.
So if she had been standing on the floor, w those same views, why would she wander away?

Q: "...whatever suddenly happened, Grandpa couldn't react in time..."
What could have happened leaving G'father insufficient time to react?

All jmo.

I don't argue my opinion. I have no idea what happened that left grandfather time to react. That's the point of a civil lawsuit.

JMO

 

[Lilibet]

Bump.

Stop arguing in this thread. If you disagree, do so respectfully and move on.
Whether you think SA should have been charged or not is irrelevant and is not going to change the fact that he HAS been charged, so please discuss the case from that standpoint.

 

[SoCalDavidS]

All of the children's play area talk is a diversion from the real issue. That being the fact it would have been impossible for her to fall out of the window without being lifted up that high. Be it not for GP's actions, she would be alive today, play area or not.

All of this talk about going after the cruise line because they allowed a dangerous situation to exist, so that this wouldn't happen to another family, is meant to garner support for their position. But that position holds no water(no pun intended), because this has never happened to a 2 year old before, in all the thousands upon thousands of cruises, and will never happen again.

 

[al66pine]

Just. Not. Safe.
My earlier posts are not 20/20 hindsight condemning the folly of G’father’s actions in the particularly narrow circumstance of toddler-tending on a cruise ship's 11th level deck w a window open to a 150 foot drop. Ditto, other posts questioning the safety consciousness of G’father.

If hypothetically G’father rested her on rail at a restaurant, playground, in their own home, where ever, on a (hand) rail, ~ 35 - 40 - 45 or more inches high, without maintaining a firm grip, his actions created the risk to her, imo.
--- Window or no window.
--- 150 foot drop or 35 - 40 - 45 inch drop.
--- Concrete, tile, carpet, or mattress as landing pad.
---Tired arms or not.
--- Watching older sibling in other area or not.

G'father's. Actions. Created. The Risk. Not Cruiseline.

Like driving in car without wearing safety belt & shoulder harness.
Who would ever do that? Oops.
Well, who would ever do that a second time, after being ticketed? Oops.
Well, who would ever do that a third time, after being ticketed the second time? Oops.
Well, who would ever do that a fourth time, after being ticketed the third time? Oops.
Looks like G’father SA would do that a fourth time. And he did.

 

[Lilibet]

G'father's. Actions. Created. The Risk. Not Cruiseline.

Seven words that say it all. Great post!

 

[they'll get you]

If you are correct, and that baby was 'seated on the railing' ---then that man should go to jail. That would be incredibly dangerous and irresponsible if he placed a baby, or even an older child, way tup here, on a small narrow piece of wood, with an open window, so high above a concrete floor.

Grandpa was not watching other children---his job was to watch his grandbaby. And keep her safe.
Putting her up in that window was a very bad decision.

There is always a lifeguard supervising the pools otherwise the pools are netted.
A lifeguard stands in the water with a pool noodle watching like a hawk for several hour shifts.
The adult pools are monitored as well.
Many parents trustingly lay on the deck chairs and sleep while their children swim.

 

[Lilibet]

There is always a lifeguard supervising the pools otherwise the pools are netted.
A lifeguard stands in the water with a pool noodle watching like a hawk for several hour shifts.
The adult pools are monitored as well.
Many parents trustingly lay on the deck chairs and sleep while their children swim.

I had read that only Disney cruises have lifeguards. But even with a lifeguard on duty, I can’t imagine sleeping while my child swims.

“Like most hotels, cruise ships don’t have lifeguards on duty. Royal Caribbean International does post signs alerting adults to the “swim at your own risk” policy and provides life jackets for children in a variety of sizes in the pool area, according to a Royal Caribbean spokeswoman. Of the major cruise companies, only Disney Cruises has lifeguards at shipboard pools.”
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article88970617.html

Well, oops, that info wasn’t up to date.

"Royal Caribbean International has implemented a water safety program across our fleet to raise awareness amongst our guests about the importance of vigilance while enjoying water features on our ships.

"This program incorporates gear and safety guidelines provided to guests throughout their cruise. These include lifeguards on duty at all pools during opening hours, swim vests for children 4 – 12 years old, a water safety presentation in the Adventure Ocean kids program as well as a teen 411 session on water safety.

Royal Caribbean Adds Lifeguards for All Swimming Pools

 

[they'll get you]

I had read that only Disney cruises have lifeguards. But even with a lifeguard on duty, I can’t imagine sleeping while my child swims.

“Like most hotels, cruise ships don’t have lifeguards on duty. Royal Caribbean International does post signs alerting adults to the “swim at your own risk” policy and provides life jackets for children in a variety of sizes in the pool area, according to a Royal Caribbean spokeswoman. Of the major cruise companies, only Disney Cruises has lifeguards at shipboard pools.”
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article88970617.html

Well, oops, that info wasn’t up to date.

"Royal Caribbean International has implemented a water safety program across our fleet to raise awareness amongst our guests about the importance of vigilance while enjoying water features on our ships.

"This program incorporates gear and safety guidelines provided to guests throughout their cruise. These include lifeguards on duty at all pools during opening hours, swim vests for children 4 – 12 years old, a water safety presentation in the Adventure Ocean kids program as well as a teen 411 session on water safety.

Royal Caribbean Adds Lifeguards for All Swimming Pools

APRIL 19, 2017
After at least a dozen drownings or near drownings on cruise ship pools in the past several years, three major cruise lines now have lifeguards on duty.



There are helpers who fit the lifevests for the children and distribute towels.
They are strict against running, diving or bombing.

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article145571359.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Lilibet]

APRIL 19, 2017
After at least a dozen drownings or near drownings on cruise ship pools in the past several years, three major cruise lines now have lifeguards on duty.

View attachment 212661 View attachment 212662 View attachment 212663

There are helpers who fit the lifevests for the children and distribute towels.
They are strict against running, diving or bombing.

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article145571359.html#storylink=cpy

Quoting your linked article, which quotes the attorney handling Chloe’s case:

“But large settlements like the one in the Disney case, as well as growing public pressure to add lifeguards, finally forced the lines to change their policies, he said.

“Public sentiment shifted because of the sheer number of children that began drowning on cruises,” Winkleman said. “A lot of people said, ‘Where are the parents?’ I absolutely think parental responsibility plays a major role. But when it was up to a dozen children, those naysayers said, ‘Gosh, maybe these big corporations should take a simple step to keep our families safe.”

In this case, I agree with him that lifeguards have become necessary...but that necessity arises because parents won’t supervise their kids. The original fault lies with parents taking their children into a potentially dangerous environment, whether it’s a water park on a cruise ship or the edge of the Grand Canyon, and refusing to keep them safe.

In Chloe’s case, the open window was not inherently dangerous until her grandfather put her in an unsafe position. I don’t think Winkleman can’t make the case that up to a dozen children have fallen from cruise ship windows.

 

[Kindred]

That's your opinion. If there was a baby seated on the railing--and absolutely no warning posted about the railing or the windows--then that is the fault of the business owner, not the family of the child.

There are ample laws in place about attractive nuisances. A cruise line is not exempt from following the law.

JMO

The FACT is that the baby should not have BEEN seated on the railing and any parent or grand parent knows this. Common sense is not to place toddlers on high surfaces that they can fall off of. Pediatricians tell parents of young children not to even turn or move away from them on changing tables because of fall risks. It's why a lot of changing tables have belts to clip around them so they don't crawl or stand or otherwise toss themselves off. An 18-month-old doesn't have the balance to perch on a narrow handrail. Would you set a child on a second floor balcony rail? Then why on earth would you find it acceptable to set one on any rail on a bobbing cruise ship let alone one in an open window?

Guests are not exempt from the rules of the ship, which they had been given copies of weeks before even getting on the boat and reminded of within hours prior to the incident, especially the one that rails are not to be climbed or sat on. GF broke the rule of common sense and the cruise line.

This is not an "attractive nuisance" because Chloe could not have sat on that rail herself. That rail is above 42 inches and there are no chairs in that area that a child could have climbed near or over that height. They still would not have been able to get to a position up over that rail. The cruise ship could not have anticipated this and is not at fault.

*edited for spelling