IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #5

[SouthAussie]

The 11:52 mark is when they rewinded the video a bit to illustrate how Chloe was walking to the window with SA following behind her. Behind the red arrow is SA. Hosts were not commenting about that group of people the arrow seems to linger on. Hope that helps.

Yes it does. Thank you.
I was wondering if they were pointing out a group of witnesses.

 

[they'll get you]

I’ll admit the La Comay video was impactful because of the noise inserted where the main incidences were happening.
It hit me even though I could not understand one word.

 

[MsMarple]

I just hate to think that the Wiegands were the ones to reach out to Winkleman in the days after Chloe’s tragic death. I didn’t have time to look through the 167 pages you posted, but here’s what I found regarding Florida law on attorneys texting potential clients (as I hypothesized earlier based on ABA Rules). Of course, he would have had to acquire a phone number somehow, but there are ways....

In 2015, the Florida Bar Standing Committee on Advertising decided that texting potential clients was a forbidden form of solicitation similar to telephone solicitation. However, later that year, the Florida Bar board of governors overruled that decision and stated that lawyers could send such messages to prospective clients, as long as they complied with the advertising rules for written and email communications.

“These [rules in Florida] are onerous, requiring the text to include attorney qualifications, disclosures about how the lawyer obtained the contact information, and a statement that the individual should delete the message if they have counsel already,” says Murphy of Wake Forest.

Can lawyers text potential clients?

I guess how the contact was made will remain a mystery, but I’d rather blame Winkleman the hustler.

I hear you but remember, many people contact a lawyer after a death or injury in belief that someone is responsible and a good lawyer will (should) give them their honest assessment of the situation. And sometimes it's justified: If a doctor removes my spleen instead of my tonsils you betcha I'm gonna sue!

But more to the point, there's a 30 day waiting period for injuries/death before a lawyer can contact someone, even if s/he follows all the rules:

30 Day Waiting Period - Rule 4-7.18(b)(1)(A) If an unsolicited direct mail or email communication concerns an action for personal injury or wrongful death or otherwise relates to an accident or disaster involving the intended recipient or a relative of that person, the lawyer must wait at least 30 days after the injury, death, accident or disaster to mail or email the communication.

Winkleman showed up in less than a week after Chloe's death. IIRC Chloe died July 7 and Winkleman gave his first interview on July 9.
Attorney: Girl fell to death from open window on cruise ship

 

[they'll get you]

Winkleman showed up in less than a week after Chloe's death. IIRC Chloe died July 7 and Winkleman gave his first interview on July 9.
Attorney: Girl fell to death from open window on cruise ship

RSBM.

Faster than a speeding bullet eh?

They must have believed SA, we did until the video.
She was in the business and maybe an associate contacted him.

 

[SouthAussie]

RSBM.

Faster than a speeding bullet eh?

They must have believed SA, we did until the video.
She was in the business and maybe an associate contacted him.

Not to mention that Chloe's dad was out there taking a photo of the window on the night of the afternoon that Chloe died.
I think their minds must have quite quickly gone to a lawsuit. Perhaps thinking "who the heck has a window open where our daughter can fall" as opposed to "who the heck holds our daughter on an 11-storey window ledge, while leaning over a safety barrier rail".

 

[Midwestmom2019]

Maybe it was magic glass! Seeing as how he was also able to put his head right through it before it had even "disappeared"!

He went through the looking glass into another dimension.

 

[IceIce9]

Was it common for SA to care for Chloe by himself before the cruise? Did he often babysit her? Or would the cruise ship have been the first time he had watched her?

I don’t mean Chloe visiting grandma and grandpa, I am talking about SA being the sole caregiver.

I am still wondering why, with five other adults on the ship, SA was chosen to care for her. He just didn’t seem like a person who was capable of being responsible for a child, from what we can see on the video even before he holds her out the window.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Was it common for SA to care for Chloe by himself before the cruise? Did he often babysit her? Or would the cruise ship have been the first time he had watched her?

I don’t mean Chloe visiting grandma and grandpa, I am talking about SA being the sole caregiver.

I am still wondering why, with five other adults on the ship, SA was chosen to care for her. He just didn’t seem like a person who was capable of being responsible for a child, from what we can see on the video even before he holds her out the window.

That is a really good question.

 

[neesaki]

I would NOT trust a journalist with something I did not want released.

I’d go to the media if I WANTED it released to the public.
That’s the only reason I can think of.

I don’t think Wman is the one who released it to Comay.
According to CBS they only viewed the partial video, didn’t actually have possession of it. I can only guess, speculate.... it’s more likely someone with RC who leaked it, because of the way it was being spun... they wanted the truth to be known.

Wman claimed it’s the one he was given. Why would he be given only a partial, cut and edited video. Then CBS reported later that the timing was off in what they originally viewed, and Wman’s explanation was “software” issues , something like that. Now everyone knows that’s wrong, and that what is seen in the video is not what he claimed.
He got busted. IMO

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

I don’t think Wman is the one who released it to Comay.
According to CBS they only viewed the partial video, didn’t actually have possession of it. I can only guess, speculate.... it’s more likely someone with RC who leaked it, because of the way it was being spun... they wanted the truth to be known.

Wman claimed it’s the one he was given. Why would he be given only a partial, cut and edited video. Then CBS reported later that the timing was off in what they originally viewed, and Wman’s explanation was “software” issues , something like that. Now everyone knows that’s wrong, and that what is seen in the video is not what he claimed.
He got busted. IMO

From all that I'm reading around online with people's comments and opinions and such, the tide is turning since the release of that video. I really can't wait to see what the eyewitnesses say in court.

 

[Yellowbeak]

I just hate to think that the Wiegands were the ones to reach out to Winkleman in the days after Chloe’s tragic death. I didn’t have time to look through the 167 pages you posted, but here’s what I found regarding Florida law on attorneys texting potential clients (as I hypothesized earlier based on ABA Rules). Of course, he would have had to acquire a phone number somehow, but there are ways....

In 2015, the Florida Bar Standing Committee on Advertising decided that texting potential clients was a forbidden form of solicitation similar to telephone solicitation. However, later that year, the Florida Bar board of governors overruled that decision and stated that lawyers could send such messages to prospective clients, as long as they complied with the advertising rules for written and email communications.

“These [rules in Florida] are onerous, requiring the text to include attorney qualifications, disclosures about how the lawyer obtained the contact information, and a statement that the individual should delete the message if they have counsel already,” says Murphy of Wake Forest.

Can lawyers text potential clients?

I guess how the contact was made will remain a mystery, but I’d rather blame Winkleman the hustler.

The mother is a lawyer. I’d assume she got the ball rolling with connections.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Slightly OT. Yesterday, DH and I watched sail-away from Port Everglades of the Sky Princess that we'll be on in 4 weeks. Ordinarily, with a cruise coming up soon, I should be somewhat excited and looking forward to a brand new ship, sunshine, ocean breezes, and a temporary escape from Michigan winter. I'm having a difficult time engendering much enthusiasm for the upcoming voyage. Even though I won't be on a RCCL ship, I think I will have Chloe on my mind, especially when I'm on the open upper decks of the vessel. It will be difficult to ignore railings, windows - open or closed, and what can be viewed from Deck 11 which is our usual choice for staterooms. This cruise, we're on Deck 9. We don't usually see many children on our late January/early February cruises, but I'm sure I'll take notice of any youngsters onboard and how they are supervised. Having followed this case so closely for six months, it will not be easy for me to forget about little Chloe.

 

[neesaki]

The mother is a lawyer. I’d assume she got the ball rolling with connections.

I think so as well.

 

[Yellowbeak]

I don’t think Wman is the one who released it to Comay.
According to CBS they only viewed the partial video, didn’t actually have possession of it. I can only guess, speculate.... it’s more likely someone with RC who leaked it, because of the way it was being spun... they wanted the truth to be known.

Wman claimed it’s the one he was given. Why would he be given only a partial, cut and edited video. Then CBS reported later that the timing was off in what they originally viewed, and Wman’s explanation was “software” issues , something like that. Now everyone knows that’s wrong, and that what is seen in the video is not what he claimed.
He got busted. IMO

That really bothers me that he is allowed to do that. It is skewing the truth to give an inaccurate account of what happened. Also, I have a hard time believing the parents were not aware of his intent to do this. She is a lawyer... she is totally aware of the process and I’d assume she is very involved in what is said and done. Same with the father... a police officer, he is trained to investigate and question everything. Do you think with this being the death of their daughter they are sitting back not involved and only doing press conferences? It seems to me it would be the opposite.... JMO

 

[justbreathe]

...

 

[LietKynes]

That really bothers me that he is allowed to do that. It is skewing the truth to give an inaccurate account of what happened. Also, I have a hard time believing the parents were not aware of his intent to do this. She is a lawyer... she is totally aware of the process and I’d assume she is very involved in what is said and done. Same with the father... a police officer, he is trained to investigate and question everything. Do you think with this being the death of their daughter they are sitting back not involved and only doing press conferences? It seems to me it would be the opposite.... JMO

Agreed.
I think there are far more levels of involvement in this than just Winkleman.
More information than we would be comfortable with.
Theses are educated people and have not displayed any reticence nor inexperience in regards to how the laws work in PR --- with their still ongoing lawsuit.

 

[justbreathe]

Interesting. And I'd say he took that pic of the open window on the same night, as there is still a crime scene all set up.

Possibly with their legal and police backgrounds, they were already gathering evidence? Before anything changed. Sort of like people do after a horrendous car crash.

They should have been desperate to see the surveillance video, too, with their legal and police backgrounds.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

They should have been desperate to see the surveillance video, too, with their legal and police backgrounds.

IIRC, Chloe's parents were offered an opportunity to view video by RCCL but declined. RC knew from the get-go what the surveillance video revealed.

 

[MsFacetious]

IIRC, Chloe's parents were offered an opportunity to view video by RCCL but declined. RC knew from the get-go what the surveillance video revealed.

I think it was LE. The offer was made at the justice department but they declined and wouldn’t even go for interviews.

 

[Arkay]

Yes, I watched the videos too many times! I just can’t make the leap you’re making to a nefarious, intentional act. Intention is what makes it murder and I don’t see that, whether it was Michael Jackson at a potentially lethal three floors up or SA at eleven floors up. Both men certainly had/have serious issues. In both cases they exhibited depraved indifference to a child’s life and safety, which is way beyond the bounds of normal behavior.

I question their judgement and decision-making ability. But I don’t see intention, even when SA leaned out the window and looked down. Curiosity, yes. The action itself is impulsive and odd. Pretending he thought the window was closed is weird. After Chloe’s death you can try to connect it, but I can’t make looking down at the dock indicative of an intentional thought process of “What a great place to drop Chloe and kill her.” I see someone impulsively trying to give Chloe a “thrill” flying high or scare her for “fun.” He took an insane risk and it killed her...negligent homicide, which is unintentional.

But you’re certainly entitled to your opinion, and LE may bring forth evidence that it was intentional and therefore murder. They don’t need to supply a motive, of course. But I’ll wait and see for now.
JMO

These are my sentiments exactly. A man way out of his depth with child care, foolish and reckless, arrogant because he seemed to purposely disregard the obvious safety issues, but with no malice aforethought. No plan to murder an 18-month old, no desire to drop her out of a window; he loved her and thought he would give her an exciting moment. He was a fool and disregarded common sense, then reflexively tried to cover up what he did; maybe he couldn't admit it to the parents or to his wife, but he certainly did not board the ship with a preconceived plan to murder this baby. Now his standing in the family and the desire to shift blame, a lawyer jumping on the case and promising a huge payout against Royal Caribbean, all work together to help him stick to his story. Then the video was released and the truth revealed. He can't back down now. His own relationship with the parents, the public, his own ability to live with what he's done, all depend on him sticking to his story. But he committed negligent homicide, he was not aided and abetted by flaws in the ship's design, he was not in a specially designated children's area, and I hope he does time.
I agree with you also, Lilibet, that if it emerges that LE has evidence that proves intent, I will accept that and change my opinion. But this is JMO for now.