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

[mickey2942]

This was the photo I was looking for, so 18 inches from outside of guard rail to the actual window opening. Thanks for the photo!

ETA, Thank you too chikkamma.

So, below the window sill, between the space from the guardrail to the window, if Chloe fell down rather than out, would she have landed on the floor?

SA seemed to have put Chloe very far out, past the window sill. Which is why she fell forward, rather than down.

 

[IceIce9]

I am going to have to take a break from this thread for awhile. Don’t want it to get shut down and don’t want to go to band camp.


One thing I appreciate about WS are the sensible members, which leads to intelligent discussions. Agree or disagree, it is always interesting to hear other opinions, when expressed in rational and polite manner.

Some days, on some threads, the above doesn’t hold true.

Have a great day everyone.

 

[IceIce9]

DBM double post

 

[MsFacetious]

Remember you always have an ignore list if someone is aggravating you.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Remember you always have an ignore list if someone is aggravating you.

Yes, this!!!

 

[Forever Young]

I have thought about how the person who opened the window where Chloe fell must feel. Just another "what if" in this tragic event.
And I hope they don't dwell on the thought that they opened that window ... they couldn't possibly know that a numbskull would place their little grandchild over a safety rail and into that open window.

I have noticed in the videos that there is a man in a black shirt who looks out the same window, just prior to SA and Chloe moving toward the same window.

It appears to me that this man takes a picture out the window with his phone, then moves on. He stretches his arm forward, but he did not have to "lean" to do this.

I believe that somewhere out there is a gentleman who has a picture taken of the open window, about 30 seconds before SA goes to the same window.

SA had to move past several closed windows, and one other open window to get to the same window the man in the black shirt had just left. MOO

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I have noticed in the videos that there is a man in a black shirt who looks out the same window, just prior to SA and Chloe moving toward the same window.

It appears to me that this man takes a picture out the window with his phone, then moves on. He stretches his arm forward, but he did not have to "lean" to do this.

I believe that somewhere out there is a gentleman who has a picture taken of the open window, about 30 seconds before SA goes to the same window.

SA had to move past several closed windows, and one other open window to get to the same window the man in the black shirt had just left. MOO

It's almost as if SA waited his turn to stand in front of the OPEN window to feel a breeze. He's a big man, was probably hot and sweaty, and was trying to get some fresh air from the OPEN window.

 

[Forever Young]

It's almost as if SA waited his turn to stand in front of the OPEN window to feel a breeze. He's a big man, was probably hot and sweaty, and was trying to get some fresh air from the OPEN window.

Yes, and he likewise is dressed in a black shirt that would suck up the heat like crazy.

 

[Montrealaise]

Well, to be fair, my point is that is does not show his head going past the window ledge because we do not know the depth of this opening.

I am thinking that this is what we can anticipate as a defense - that he still did not know there was not glass there.

We have only seen the video from inside the ship.There must have been several cameras outside the ship and I think they would show just how far his head is out the window. Sadly, they would also show Chloe's fall so I think the only time those videos would be shown is at trial - both SA's criminal trial and the family's civil lawsuit against RCCL.

 

[Montrealaise]

BBM. Because the cruise lines are a major source of tourist income to San Juan. Embarrass and humiliate the parents and maybe the civil lawsuit will go away. That might work in another country but it isn't going to work in the U.S.

JMO

Why would the video embarrass and humiliate the parents if the grandfather did nothing wrong? If they are embarrassed and humiliated, it's because the video shows that the man they have been publicly defending is responsible for the death of their daughter.

 

[justbreathe]

I remember when this happened, but I don't think it was the impetus for high-rise regulations. I've mentioned in several posts that I'm a native New Yorker, and as it happens I live on the 11th floor of an apartment building. When Clapton's son ran and kept running and went out the open window, there were already laws in NYC requiring safety bars for all windows in buildings that had at least three stories. My 38-year old daughter was nine in March 1991 when Clapton's son died, and the law here requires window bars until all children are over 10 years old. As it happens, I still have the bars on because I just never took them out. Now I have three grandchildren, two of whom are still younger than ten. I guess eventually I'll remove them when they are all old enough.

That law was in place when Clapton's four-year old son died so tragically. Unfortunately since that home was a condo and not a co-op like mine, they were free to choose whether or not to comply. That to me is nonsensical, and you may be right that it was an impetus for condo associations to adhere to the NYC law.

To the best of my knowledge, these laws exist because children who are no longer in a crib can wake up and do crazy things while the parents are asleep. If there were no safety bars in the windows, I know for certain that neither I nor any other adults in the family would lift any children up and over the windows or the terrace.

Happy New Year to all of you. I won't be in Times Square but if any of you are coming, the security rules are necessarily strict, but the weather is decent.
May 2020 bring fewer tragedies to write about on Websleuths.

Thanks for the background, I thought I may have been mistaken. What a horrifying story it was and still is!
Happy New Year to everyone!

 

[justbreathe]

Thank you, that was exactly my point.

IMO, SA was negligent the moment Chloe went over and outside that railing. IMO, he knew the window was open. IMO it is a clear case of negligent homicide.

But the Wiegands are looking for at least partial responsibility on the part of RCCL and the ship design. A big pay-out for 50% or 25% or even 10% responsibility (not to mention how much better SA and the rest of the family would feel about that).

SA was rocking the baby on the railing and she was pitched forward and out. This could have happened without SA's head or arm reach going totally past the window opening.

Like nearly everyone else who has viewed the La Comay video, I also thought SA had breached the opening of the window to the outside just prior to lifting Chloe over the railing. After many views, though, I am thinking that is unlikely.

IMO, it is going to be hard to prove that any part of his body breached that opening. And IMO, this case is not going to be the "slam dunk" that we all thought it was going to be, upon first viewing the video.

I have a feeling there are videos showing the outside of the ship, as well as witnesses who saw what SA was doing and I am interested in seeing and hearing these things.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Why would the video embarrass and humiliate the parents if the grandfather did nothing wrong? If they are embarrassed and humiliated, it's because the video shows that the man they have been publicly defending is responsible for the death of their daughter.

Yup, pretty much. Game Over.

 

[KR72]

Were there many people on the ground when poor Chloe fell? Imagine the trauma they must have endured if they actually witnessed the moment from the ground.

 

[MsFacetious]

Were there many people on the ground when poor Chloe fell? Imagine the trauma they must have endured if they actually witnessed the moment from the ground.

I don't believe so. It appeared not to be a public area, it looked to be fenced off. I'm hoping that is accurate. There are enough people with PTSD from this event I'm sure, without that being an issue as well.

 

[Montrealaise]

Remember the Captain of the Costa Concordia? He was charged with abandoning ship (along with manslaughter and other charges) but he claimed he fell off the ship and landed in a lifeboat.
Costa Concordia disaster | Collision, Rescue, Salvage, & Facts



I suppose this is OT but the captain’s excuse does remind me of excuses SA has made.

Ah yes - Captain Coward. Wasn't he one of the first people to get off the ship? I remember an interview with the cab driver who drove the captain to his hotel - he said the captain complained that his socks had gotten wet! People lost their lives, and he complained about his wet socks.

 

[MsFacetious]

I remember when this happened, but I don't think it was the impetus for high-rise regulations. I've mentioned in several posts that I'm a native New Yorker, and as it happens I live on the 11th floor of an apartment building. When Clapton's son ran and kept running and went out the open window, there were already laws in NYC requiring safety bars for all windows in buildings that had at least three stories. My 38-year old daughter was nine in March 1991 when Clapton's son died, and the law here requires window bars until all children are over 10 years old. As it happens, I still have the bars on because I just never took them out. Now I have three grandchildren, two of whom are still younger than ten. I guess eventually I'll remove them when they are all old enough.

That law was in place when Clapton's four-year old son died so tragically. Unfortunately since that home was a condo and not a co-op like mine, they were free to choose whether or not to comply. That to me is nonsensical, and you may be right that it was an impetus for condo associations to adhere to the NYC law.

To the best of my knowledge, these laws exist because children who are no longer in a crib can wake up and do crazy things while the parents are asleep. If there were no safety bars in the windows, I know for certain that neither I nor any other adults in the family would lift any children up and over the windows or the terrace.

Happy New Year to all of you. I won't be in Times Square but if any of you are coming, the security rules are necessarily strict, but the weather is decent.
May 2020 bring fewer tragedies to write about on Websleuths.

Also want to note that it wasn't a Clapton residence at all. It was a friends residence and the "window" was never supposed to be opened at all. It was supposed to be permanently locked but the lock was broken and the janitor had opened it for fresh air.

So this could happen to someone without any children, without any bars, who just had a child over to visit one time.

The Truth about Clapton and the death of our son

For anyone who wants to read the whole story.

 

[neesaki]

Also want to note that it wasn't a Clapton residence at all. It was a friends residence and the "window" was never supposed to be opened at all. It was supposed to be permanently locked but the lock was broken and the janitor had opened it for fresh air.

The Truth about Clapton and the death of our son

For anyone who wants to read the whole story.

Oh no.

 

[Seattle1]

We have only seen the video from inside the ship.There must have been several cameras outside the ship and I think they would show just how far his head is out the window. Sadly, they would also show Chloe's fall so I think the only time those videos would be shown is at trial - both SA's criminal trial and the family's civil lawsuit against RCCL.

This case is about pursuing justice for a child that tragically lost her life too soon-- leaving behind a broken family. I could not agree with you more that the surveillance videos belong in the courtroom.

Preserving both the chain of custody and preservation of evidence in discovery before and during a trial is a critical part of our judicial process and I don't think this case should be treated any differently. I'm appalled by both the Puerto Rican AG and the family attorney in their handling this evidence.

I've said it before that it's not necessary to see any video to know that baby Chloe could not reach the window she fell from without her grandfather raising her to the window -- let alone breaching the permanent, safety guard rail in place for the protection of all passengers and cruise line staff. IMO it's that simple.

And the ship's window glass which begins at floor level up to the height of the guard rail was sufficient and accessible for the toddler to "bang on" without placing her in extreme danger. No excuse.

MOO

 

[Midwestmom2019]

This allegation makes no sense.

Why would the Puerto Rican authorities allegedly leaking the video further humiliate the parents because they filed a civil lawsuit?

You do understand that the wrongful death civil lawsuit is against the cruise line, right?

MOO

A wannabe lawyer.