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

[oviedo]

What about the windows below the railing? Those didn't open and would have been PERFECT for the glass banging ritual. I find SA's lack of judgement contemptible and inexcusable. People who think it's "OK" to teach kids to bang on ANY glass need a course in common sense and basic safety.

Exactly - the banging glass story just makes no sense / and if the video shows him actually dangling her outside the railing - well then that’s clearly negligent homicide IMO and he was charged after the prosecution presented evidence so there is enough proof IMO / either he sat her on the rail (where were her legs dangling ? Inside or outside?) which is the families story or he actually held her outside the window and lost his grip ? Either way she was in a position to fall and that would not have happened if he let her bang on the window with her feet planted on the deck and never picked her up IMO

 

[oviedo]

Just watching CBS coverage and the one policeman illustrates what he saw GP do after viewing the video. It's chilling.

According to this man, SA was balancing Chloe on the wooden railing, and apparently let his hands go open (having no grip on Chloe at all).

I know the excuse is that he thought there was glass there, but if there had been glass, Chloe's position would have had to be closer to SA, as he couldn't have leaned her forward. MOO.

And there it is - the video will prove all IMO

 

[gitana1]

If the parents want to watch, I think the tape could be edited by LE to show only what led up to Chloe’s fall, without including the fall itself. Their attorney, however, will have an opportunity to watch the entire tape.

True

 

[justbreathe]

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.

There are

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

This is not a hotel, it is a ship. The have decks with just a railing. They have balconies with just a railing.

And some hotels have balconies on high floors.

 

[justbreathe]

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

A ship is not a floating hotel. A ship is a big boat.

 

[IceIce9]

There are

This is not a hotel, it is a ship. The have decks with just a railing. They have balconies with just a railing.

And some hotels have balconies on high floors.

I just stayed in a hotel with balconies on high floors. I didn’t see anyone allowing toddlers to sit on the rails, bang on glass, or dangle over the edge.

 

[justbreathe]

If that is what you prefer, why not go to an area away from the children's area?

I've seen no evidence that the family wasn't being responsible for the children traveling with them.

JMO

No evidence except a dead baby. I think that a baby fell out an open window 11 stories up is evidence someone wasn’t being responsible. And that someone isn’t Chloe. This was entirely preventable.

 

[GoneGoldfishin']

See all these high places with rails but no screens/windows? You have to be a responsible parent, and make sure your child is not trying to climb up, on, or over the rails. There aren't any signs needed to tell you that falling could hurt or kill you. And especially don't SET YOUR BABY ON THE RAILING ON PURPOSE.

 

[justbreathe]

Not to mention that the family happened to have a photo of Chloe banging on glass in a hockey arena. The family and their lawyer were attempting to justify Chloe wanting to bang on the glass because she was allowed to do it in hockey arenas.

The photo actually just shows her with her hands pressed against the glass. We have no idea if she banged on the glass without a video.

 

[Lilibet]

I just stayed in a hotel with balconies on high floors. I didn’t see anyone allowing toddlers to sit on the rails, bang on glass, or dangle over the edge.

BBM

It’s not often you see a Michael Jackson dangling baby Blanket off a balcony.

 

[justbreathe]

‘Double devastation’: When kids die by accident, should caregivers be charged?

A grandfather's arrest after a toddler in his care plummeted to her death off a cruise ship highlights the intricacies of negligence cases, experts say.

Chloe Wiegand's family has no doubt her death was a horrific accident. They harbor no blame against her grandfather, Salvatore "Sam" Anello, who was with the toddler when she fell out of an 11th story window on a Royal Caribbean cruise in July.

But prosecutors — who on Monday arrested Anello on charges of negligent homicide — see the case differently. The charges, experts say, highlight a legal gray area: Should caregivers be held criminally responsible if a tragedy that was truly accidental resulted in the loss of a child's life?...

They harbor no blame against the guy who held her up to an open window and dropped her. But they blame the cruise line for having open windows. This makes no sense. At all. At. All.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

They harbor no blame against the guy who held her up to an open window and dropped her. But they blame the cruise line for having open windows. This makes no sense. At all. At. All.

The immediate money grab was what made me sick. The go..fund...website. The basically instantaneous lawsuit. Leaving the area before there could be a full investigation. SA refusing a breathalyzer test. Mom's demeanor during the TV interview. Trying to embellish and make things sound worse by LYING and saying that the open window was in a children's play area. None of it sits right with me. JUST MY OWN OPINION.
Maybe I have lived too long and seen too much. If someone or something is SOOOOO precious to you, you do not put that person or thing in such a dangerous position just basically ASKING for a disaster to happen. Unless you're a complete moron, and then if that were the case it makes no sense someone entrusting you with their precious child out of their sight. There are so many layers of not right here.

 

[al66pine]

What Happened?

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

@MyBelle Trying to follow ^ line of thinking.

If "the point of a civil lawsuit" is for Mom & Dad to learn "what happened" then wouldn't the best way to get that info be for Mom & Dad to ask G'father "What Happened"?
He was the one holding Chloe when something "happened."
Wouldn't he be the one to ask?
Why would Mom & Dad not ask him "what happened?"
Maybe they did ask.
Maybe he told them the truth, something that implicated him of being negligent, perhaps grossly negligent, in causing Chloe's death.
If so, maybe they know "what happened," did not like it, did not want to accept it as true.

Who wants to think a family member caused or was in any way involved in the death of another loved one?

If there's a chance to try to blame someone else, why not file a lawsuit to learn "what happened." Might learn "what happened" is G'father is only 99.9% responsible for Chloe's death, and the other one tenth of one percent which may have contributed to causation is cruiseline's having an operable window on board a cruise ship. jmo.

 

[katsrfun]

LBM
Good point !
Without the added pressures of those seeking a settlement; this would have quietly gone away.
So not the fault of Puerto Rico, nor the Royal Caribbean Cruise line.
It's doubtful either PR nor RCCL wanted this fight.
And it will be a struggle, regardless of what the video shows.

The family did not want to see the footage, but are furious they haven't been given a copy. According to above link. Post #187 by @MsMarple , thanks.

The PR LE and RCCL are wise to hang on to the footage and not allow the original to be seized, as footage can be tampered with.
This is their main protection !
Imo.

Does anyone know, is it possible for the civil lawsuit to be won in some amount, say holding the ship partially responsible and still going forward with charges against the grandfather. Or on the other hand, if the criminal trial is first and he is found guilty, can the family still go forward with a civil suit? Thanks, to all. What a sad, sad case. There are surely no winners here. Katt

 

[Lilibet]

@Kakidoll I’m taking the liberty of fixing your reply in post #601 so it’s more visible. It got buried in the OP’s comment and it’s worth reading IMO.

Have you ever been on a cruise ship? There are railings ALL around the entire ship. It is a safety measure. It means DON"T CRAWL OVER THE RAILING. Common sense is NOT used anymore. People use any excuse to not use common sense or take responsibility. Ships are VERY safe unless you are stupid, careless, drunk or TRY to go overboard. And i see it happening all the time. Teens want to balance and walk on the rail... they fall. OOPS, its the ships fault. No, its the dumbass's fault that did what he shouldn't have done. And its PARENTS responsibility to watch over the ones that are too young to know better. That baby could have banged on her own second story window and broken it out and fallen thru. THEN who is at fault?

 

[al66pine]

The immediate money grab was what made me sick. The go..fund...website. The basically instantaneous lawsuit. ...There are so many layers of not right here.

@SaguaroSpirit Crowd fundraising? I do not recall or I missed it.

Per ToS, seems we can discuss gen'ly now, since there's no intent to solicit/no way to make donations.
$ amt of goal?
Stated beneficiary/ies?
Intended use of funds?
Name of organizer/sponsor?

Just curious, TiA.

 

[Safeguard]

Who decides what’s baseless, senseless and biased - you? Self-monitoring is one thing, monitoring by one persistent user who needs to chime in every time a post doesn’t meet their personal standards is tiring.

Not only that but we're offt reminded not to police other posters. ( "don't tell others how to post"). But I +1000 this and the "helpful" souls who bump moderator warnings gets old...

 

[Lilibet]

@SaguaroSpirit Crowd fundraising? I do not recall or I missed it.

Per ToS, seems we can discuss gen'ly now, since there's no intent to solicit/no way to make donations.
$ amt of goal?
Stated beneficiary/ies?
Intended use of funds?
Name of organizer/sponsor?

Just curious, TiA.

It was through a fundraising site I’ve never heard of—Fund ly and was started by an individual, perhaps a friend connected with LE. The goal was $50K. Its stated purpose was to raise money for:

• Funeral expenses
• Travel expenses for the family
• Unpaid medical bills
• Any funds collected in excess of the above will be used to provide educational resources for Chloe's siblings

256 donors raised $21,675. It is still open for 60 more days.

 

[sl222]

MOO here. I don't know if the parents have ever been told or shown via demonstration exactly what the GF did. They said that he told them "I thought there was glass." (I don't believe he thought that, but I think he said this out of anguish and desperation and wishing this could be undone but knowing it can't be.)

The parents may never see a depiction of exactly what happened and if that's the case, then they've been done something of a disservice, you could say, by being lied to and encouraged to put the blame on the cruise line.

The translation of 2 different articles says:

"However, EL VOCERO said that prosecutor Ivette Nieves along with the agents of Child Abuse and Homicide of the Criminal Investigation Corps (CIC) of San Juan yesterday reviewed the recordings of the cruise security cameras, where police sources said he sees the maternal grandfather rocking her until [she] falls from his arms and dies..."

"Police sources insist that the maternal grandfather had the girl in his arms and that [she] appears sticking out of it through the window, from which [she] fell. Prosecutor Ivette Nieves, given the refusal of Chloe's relatives to testify, could use the tapes in the eventual filing of negligence charges under the child protection law against Anello, a crime that has a maximum penalty of three years in jail."

Vídeo será determinante en investigación sobre muerte de niña en crucero

Reiteran que investigan "múltiples ángulos" por muerte de niña en crucero

Also he doesn't legally have to ever make a statement or incriminate himself, right? Since videos exist of what happened, and they have videos from "multiple angles" it seems logical that this won't get tried in court but he will accept some kind of charge and that would avoid the family ever seeing the evidence. I am not a lawyer or expert so that's just a guess.

I think the possibilities with this situation are potentially volatile for the whole family. They can't all have the exact same opinion of this matter. The stress must be enormous. Their crusade happening so soon is not helping them except to deflect blame and go straight denial as far as what they're saying to the public. I found it hard to hear Mrs. Wiegand say on tv that "Sam has never put our children in danger" (paraphrasing) when that's exactly what he did.

The authorities in PR did wait some time for the family to grieve and to not rush to file charges in general. Also there was a hurricane or tropical storm during the past 3 months there.

Another factor that didn't help the family with dealing with the officials there is that they were not in their community or culture so there were a lot more unknowns at play. I can understand their not automatically cooperating just as a routine decision of people who are familiar with the law; everyone has a right to get legal advice and representation and people can't be faulted for that. It sounds like the PR authorities have done a good job in a very respectful way in how they have handled this and I am glad they filed charges because people have to be accountable for what they do with children.

It seems like we're becoming a world that goes around saying "If we think this person really feels bad about what they did then we can just let them be punished enough by how bad they feel and let this go." That seems to be the case a lot lately. I noticed this lately with the man who forgot his twins in a hot car. Everyone was so sympathetic to him just because they saw pictures of him looking extremely remorseful. I don't doubt he feels terrible but it's so strange how these days people make judgments based on emotion and optics.

Like others have said, if this was a babysitter or cruise employee then everything would be totally different. Why does the GF get a pass just because it's assumed he only had good intentions? He probably has good intentions but only in his own mind in this case. Like someone else said, this wasn't just one mistake, it was a series of really bad decisions. Maybe even horrific decisions if the police descriptions are accurate and no one who saw the video ever changed the description.

It's ironic that so many parents are shut out of their adult children's lives over things where no one died or was injured. Here we have a step-granddad who is not only not being blamed but is being heatedly defended on national tv by the parents of the child he recklessly caused to die. Not only that, they already know this man and know his failings; they probably thought nothing could possibly go wrong on that part of the ship. It must be horrible to have a family member do something so awful. The rest of the family has to suffer for the irresponsible and reckless actions of one. And count me as one who definitely thinks he was inebriated.

 

[borndem]

Standing ovation! And I’m so sorry you experienced the death of a child on a cruise. The video of the kids’ pool area shows how much activity and running around goes on. It would take total concentration to keep track of your child. What people don’t realize is that drownings are quiet and are so easy to overlook, even with a conscientious parent looking on.

And we all know that a “lightly supervised” child is a target for predators. So parents, watch your kids or hire a responsible nanny for the trip...please.

8 Silent but Deadly Signs of Someone Drowning

Thanks, Lilibet -- I was holding my breath as I read it! Scary, scary, scary -- and very informative. I'm sure that is why many neighborhood, Y, country club or other non-home pools have the lifeguard call for a pool check every 10 minutes in a children's pool. Even good 8-year old swimmers can get in trouble, and certainly those younger than that can do so.