IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #6

[they'll get you]

Oh my goodness! I just realized I'm colorblind!

I can’t tell. The only way to know is to throw a child out of one.

I think we have winners for this stupid question
You guys will have to spit the $500,000,000.00

 

[they'll get you]

One thing I noticed about the crew member opening the window is that he turned a bit to the side which allows for a slightly longer reach. Kind of like how it appears SA shifts her to one hand before she goes out the window.

(Did anyone see that RCCL had a fatality in PR today? Oasis of the Seas.) David Begnaud on Twitter

Thanx wwb - I wonder if he was clowning around or another suicide?

BREAKING: Divers just recovered the body of a white male who fell from the 10th story deck of @RoyalCarribean's Oasis of the Seas' which is docked in San Juan, Puerto Rico, right now. The ship is hosting an Atlantis cruise which caters to the LGBTQ+ community.

 

[al66pine]

Rule Against Admitting Evd of Subsequent Remedial Measures. Exceptions?

Yes, agree. However, if RCCL did change the windows after this incident, that information could be introduce for reasons other than to prove negligence, etc....

@Lawsmygame2 sbm for focus. I was hoping you or someone familiar w the rule & exceptions would respond. Thanks for your post about possible jury misuse/confusion/misinterp when evd of remedial measures comes in. I skimmed Notes of the Advisory Committees on the Rule (and some cases cited and discussed):
Exceptions, explicitly enumerated in Rule 407 include:
-- ownership or control,
-- existence of duty,
-- feasibility of precautionary measures, if controverted, and
-- impeachment.
Hypothetical: If RCL changes windows configuration**, which exceptions would Winkleman try to use? What evd, etc?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Rule 407. Subsequent Remedial Measures. <---has Committee Notes.
Rule 407 - Subsequent Remedial Measures | 2020 Federal Rules of Evidence
** which is not likely (impossible?) to do w current refurbishment. Not like RCL can send a couple guys w a U-Haul truck down to Lowes or Home Depot to grab a gross or two of windows to pop in. Custom design, lead time, etc. And IIRC, from RCL's Motion, refurbishment is being done in Spain.

 

[Area52]

The ship is called Anthem of the Seas which has the windows that do not open.
I just found the document, but I downloaded it on January 3 so if you go back to that date maybe you can find it.
I would post it myself but I don't know how and I'm not sure I can with my phone. (Sorry!)

This is a photo from YouTube of the lounge area from Anthem of the Sea. The windows definately open. Maybe you're thinking of another ship. Most ships have operable windows near the pool areas due to the humidity. They are up high enough that a child couldn't get to them. I think if you take SA out of the equation, Chloe would still be alive. Moo

 

[Sillybilly]

Just jumping in to bump Tricia's post from earlier this week.

HEY EVERYONE,
WE NEED YOUR HELP! IT'S FREE AND TAKES JUST A FEW SECONDS!
CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE TO THE WEBSLEUTHS YOUTUBE CHANNEL!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TXf5vfAv8k
We are past the halfway mark. We need 1000 subscribers before we can go live with something called "Smart Chat". Using Smart Chat to broadcast live will help Websleuths continue to operate.
Right now at Websleuths youtube, we have the latest Websleuths Radio Podcast with Leigh Egan from Crimeoneline.com Leigh updates us on the Heidi Broussard case, Paighton Houston and so much more.
Click on the link and hit the "Subscribe" button and help Websleuths.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TXf5vfAv8k

Thank you,
Tricia

 

[justice4allnow]

The ship is called Anthem of the Seas which has the windows that do not open.
I just found the document, but I downloaded it on January 3 so if you go back to that date maybe you can find it.
I would post it myself but I don't know how and I'm not sure I can with my phone. (Sorry!)

Thank you for your reply. So if it's in the lawsuit, then again it's Mr Winkleman asserting that, just as he did at the news conference which I quoted. I'm looking for information from an objective third party source to confirm that. Just can't find any online yet, but it's possible that a video will turn up, as one did for deck 11 of the FOTS.

 

[neesaki]

I am trying to take the Occam's Razor approach to this, but there is something I can't fathom ...

I have seen a video of the mother backing Gramps to the hilt, "he never put her in harm's way" etc, but surely even looking at the windows at the time, raises the question "what the f*** were you doing putting my daughter up there against the OPEN window?".

I can't yet square that circle. Conspiracy? Just can't see that, especially by throwing her out onto the dock. There must be better ways out at sea. And there's no reason to suspect it.
Maybe she does blame him, but it is just cold-hearted opportunism when a chance of compo get dangled before them. He can't be guilty in order to get that. Don't know.
Maybe she just didn't even register the difference between the open/closed windows? That could be understandable in the circumstances.
I wonder if/when she first saw the video ?
Any one else got thoughts on this ?

I still want to hear about what was said in the immediate aftermath, i.e. pre "lawyered up" comments.
I'm going to be like a broken record on this because most of the "post lawyered up" stuff is designed to misdirect. I think the immediate aftermath comments are where the honest bits will be found in this case. I just hope all that hasn't evaporated before the trial.

Although whatever is said, I think reckless negligence is nailed on.

JMOO.

From what I recall, he said “I dropped my child”. That’s all I know of that he said right afterwards.

 

[justice4allnow]

View attachment 227477
This is a photo from YouTube of the lounge area from Anthem of the Sea. The windows definately open. Maybe you're thinking of another ship. Most ships have operable windows near the pool areas due to the humidity. They are up high enough that a child couldn't get to them. I think if you take SA out of the equation, Chloe would still be alive. Moo

Thank you, Area 54! This is what I was trying to find. Since this terrible event occurred there have been many statements made, thank you for helping to sort through them.

 

[al66pine]

Windows in RCL's Newer Ship? Can Jury Be Told?

Well, in the lawsuit it was suggested that RCCL were aware that the windows were a safety issue and that's why they installed un-openable windows near the pool area on their newer ship. I wonder if the defense can bring that up if they do go to trial. Imo

MsBetsy Possibly. Likely before any mention of that to jury, judge will review info from both parties on this question. What can parties argue?

Remember how Winkleman - in his media appearances - has made a lotta noise about the dangerous windows being sooooo close to the childrens play area?
From reviewing Anthem deck plans ** & photos, imo, Anthem's deck plan for Deck 14 where its H20 Zone (aka, splash pad, aka childrens play area) is located is different from Fr/Seas. For ex: Anthem's splash pad is closer to outer walls of windows than Fr/Seas, so RCL designed Anthems w non-opening windows. This is one example RCL can raise in motions & briefs, arguing to judge that Winkleman should not be allowed to mention Anthem's windows to jury, saying that RCL did not change later window design because Fr/Seas design was dangerous, but because Anthem's layout was different.

Maybe you or another poster can find and link some youtube videos of Anthem's splash pad. Or some enlightening photos from the deckplans link below.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
* Work in Progress - LMAW, P.A./ scroll to chrono list, click Complaint - Wiegand.
"Industry Standard – Defendant’s Other Vessels
32. Notably, Defendant’s newer vessels do comply with the foregoing industry standards by having glass panes that do not open in the same or similar water park area for children. For instance, as depicted below, the glass panes near the water park aboard the Anthem of the Seas do not open at all:" bbm
[[[...2 photos...]]]
"33. The fact that Defendant’s newer vessels comply with industry standards on windows,
including the Anthem of the Seas, serves as evidence that Defendant knew or should have known..."
** Anthem of the Seas Deck Plans, Diagrams, Pictures, Video On deck 14 plan page, click on little camera icons, for 20+ photos of Anthem splash pad.

 

[MsBetsy]

View attachment 227477
This is a photo from YouTube of the lounge area from Anthem of the Sea. The windows definately open. Maybe you're thinking of another ship. Most ships have operable windows near the pool areas due to the humidity. They are up high enough that a child couldn't get to them. I think if you take SA out of the equation, Chloe would still be alive. Moo

I was just repeating what was stated in the documents.
I went back to check and the newer ship that was used as an example was called "Anthem of the Sea."
There is a picture of it in the document but I have not seen the YouTube video.

Imo

 

[al66pine]

Pix of Anthem & windows

The ship is called Anthem of the Seas which has the windows that do not open. I just found the document, but I downloaded it on January 3 so if you go back to that date maybe you can find it.I would post it myself but I don't know how and I'm not sure I can with my phone. (Sorry!)

@MsBetsy I do not know about all the windows on Anthem, but Complaint at red below has a couple pix of Anthem splash pad. And more pix at link, below.

* Work in Progress - LMAW, P.A./ scroll to chrono list, click Complaint-Wiegand. Dec 11
"Industry Standard – Defendant’s Other Vessels
32. Notably, Defendant’s newer vessels do comply with the foregoing industry standards by having glass panes that do not open in the same or similar water park area for children. For instance, as depicted below, the glass panes near the water park aboard the Anthem of the Seas do not open at all:" bbm
[[[...2 photos...]]]

** Anthem of the Seas Deck Plans, Diagrams, Pictures, Video On deck 14 plan page, click on little camera icons, for 20+ photos of Anthem splash pad.

 

[al66pine]

RCL's Newer Ships & Anthem. Windows, Again.

Thank you for your reply. So if it's in the lawsuit, then again it's Mr Winkleman asserting that, just as he did at the news conference which I quoted. I'm looking for information from an objective third party source to confirm that. Just can't find any online yet, but it's possible that a video will turn up, as one did for deck 11 of the FOTS.

@justice4allnow Yes, asserts.
In paragraph 32, Winkleman states "Defendant’s newer vessels do comply..." Also in same paragraph, he gives the Anthem example and attaches two pix, but does not mention other RCL ships by name in Complaint, IIRC.

 

[MsBetsy]

Windows in RCL's Newer Ship? Can Jury Be Told?
MsBetsy Possibly. Likely before any mention of that to jury, judge will review info from both parties on this question. What can parties argue?

Remember how Winkleman - in his media appearances - has made a lotta noise about the dangerous windows being sooooo close to the childrens play area?
From reviewing Anthem deck plans ** & photos, imo, Anthem's deck plan for Deck 14 where its H20 Zone (aka, splash pad, aka childrens play area) is located is different from Fr/Seas. For ex: Anthem's splash pad is closer to outer walls of windows than Fr/Seas, so RCL designed Anthems w non-opening windows. This is one example RCL can raise in motions & briefs, arguing to judge that Winkleman should not be allowed to mention Anthem's windows to jury, saying that RCL did not change later window design because Fr/Seas design was dangerous, but because Anthem's layout was different.

Maybe you or another poster can find and link some youtube videos of Anthem's splash pad. Or some enlightening photos from the deckplans link below.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
* Work in Progress - LMAW, P.A./ scroll to chrono list, click Complaint - Wiegand.
"Industry Standard – Defendant’s Other Vessels
32. Notably, Defendant’s newer vessels do comply with the foregoing industry standards by having glass panes that do not open in the same or similar water park area for children. For instance, as depicted below, the glass panes near the water park aboard the Anthem of the Seas do not open at all:" bbm
[[[...2 photos...]]]
"33. The fact that Defendant’s newer vessels comply with industry standards on windows,
including the Anthem of the Seas, serves as evidence that Defendant knew or should have known..."
** Anthem of the Seas Deck Plans, Diagrams, Pictures, Video On deck 14 plan page, click on little camera icons, for 20+ photos of Anthem splash pad.

Thank you.
It's hard to determine what evidence will be allowed in court and what will not and for what reason. (at least for me)

I would think that the fact that they complied with "industry standard on windows" on the newer ship does not necessarily mean they did NOT comply with standards on the older ship.
As long as they met the proper safety requirements it would be hard to prove any negligence on their part.

Imo

 

[justice4allnow]

A few things . . .

I'd like to know exactly how long SA was watching/babysitting Chloe prior to the time the video picks them up as they are walking over to that pillar.

In an online video of a new conference, I saw and heard Mr Winkleman state that after Kim called Sam to take over with Chloe, that Sam then played with her in the splash pad area, they both showered in that area, then Sam followed Chloe over to the windows. But I don't know the exact time.

 

[MsBetsy]

Thank you for your reply. So if it's in the lawsuit, then again it's Mr Winkleman asserting that, just as he did at the news conference which I quoted. I'm looking for information from an objective third party source to confirm that. Just can't find any online yet, but it's possible that a video will turn up, as one did for deck 11 of the FOTS.

Yes, sorry, it was Winkleman who made the claim.
I don't know how he went about confirming that the windows don't open but if he is wrong then it's irresponsible and misleading and doesn't help their case much, I would think.
It may just be a desperate attempt to prove that the ship did not comply with safety standards when they actually did.
Apparently the passengers are free to open the windows themselves and I doubt they would allow that if there was some kind of safety regulation preventing them from doing so.

Imo

 

[al66pine]

Thank you. It's hard to determine what evidence will be allowed in court and what will not and for what reason. (at least for me)....Imo

@MsBetsy sbm bbm. You are welcome, and I hope some of our verified/currently practicing/trial/experienced attys and other legal professionals will weigh in w their thoughts on these admissible/non-admissible evd issues.
I think it is difficult for atty's trying cases gen'ly & gonna be extremely difficult for atty's in this case.

 

[Lawsmygame2]

Rule Against Admitting Evd of Subsequent Remedial Measures. Exceptions?
@Lawsmygame2 sbm for focus. I was hoping you or someone familiar w the rule & exceptions would respond. Thanks for your post about possible jury misuse/confusion/misinterp when evd of remedial measures comes in. I skimmed Notes of the Advisory Committees on the Rule (and some cases cited and discussed):
Exceptions, explicitly enumerated in Rule 407 include:
-- ownership or control,
-- existence of duty,
-- feasibility of precautionary measures, if controverted, and
-- impeachment.
Hypothetical: If RCL changes windows configuration**, which exceptions would Winkleman try to use? What evd, etc?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Rule 407. Subsequent Remedial Measures. <---has Committee Notes.
Rule 407 - Subsequent Remedial Measures | 2020 Federal Rules of Evidence
** which is not likely (impossible?) to do w current refurbishment. Not like RCL can send a couple guys w a U-Haul truck down to Lowes or Home Depot to grab a gross or two of windows to pop in. Custom design, lead time, etc. And IIRC, from RCL's Motion, refurbishment is being done in Spain.

When measures are taken that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove:

• negligence;
• culpable conduct;
• a defect in a product or its design; or
• a need for a warning or instruction.

But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as impeachment or - if disputed — proving ownership, control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures.

The actual rule only has four noted exceptions. However, this list is not exhaustive which is evident by the language “such as.” So, existence of duty could be an exception as well as other possible exceptions.

I believe there has been a case or cases where the “existence of duty” was an allowable exception. However, IMO, it is limited because an “existence of care” is synonymous to “duty of care” which is one element of negligence. So, IMO, because subsequent measures are excluded to prove negligence, then the “existence of duty” should/must also be excluded.

IMO, MW will not be able to get the evidence of subsequent measures in but if argued in front the jury, even if the court declined his motion to introduce the subsequent measures, the jury has heard it and, as I stated before, jurors (even when properly instructed otherwise) could still likely consider it (not legally) as RCCL “admitting” the window design was flawed/needed to be changed and this may sway the verdict in favor of the plaintiff. JMO

 

[al66pine]

Admitting Evd of Subsequent Remedial Measures. Exceptions? Jury Deliberation?

....The actual rule only has four noted exceptions. ...
I believe there has been a case or cases where the “existence of duty” was an allowable exception. However, IMO, it is limited because an “existence of care” is synonymous to “duty of care” which is one element of negligence. So, IMO, because subsequent measures are excluded to prove negligence, then the “existence of duty” should/must also be excluded.
IMO, MW will not be able to get the evidence of subsequent measures in but if argued in front the jury, even if the court declined his motion to introduce the subsequent measures, the jury has heard it and, as I stated before, jurors (even when properly instructed otherwise) could still likely consider it (not legally) as RCCL “admitting” the window design was flawed/needed to be changed and this may sway the verdict in favor of the plaintiff. JMO

@Lawsmygame2 Thanks for your response. Even when jury is properly instructed, as you said before, jury can misuse/misinterp. Mos' def', agreeing w you.

 

[Lawsmygame2]

Admitting Evd of Subsequent Remedial Measures. Exceptions? Jury Deliberation?
@Lawsmygame2 Thanks for your response. Even when jury is properly instructed, as you said before, jury can misuse/misinterp. Mos' def', agreeing w you.

I definitely did not think you were disagreeing with me. Sometimes I get off in my own little world in my discussions and fail to answer the question originally posed to me. You asked which exclusion would MW use? In my round-a-bout way, I was trying to say it doesn’t matter ... he won’t win. . JMO

 

[al66pine]

Timeline. How Long Did SA Supervise Chloe?

.....I'd like to know exactly how long SA was watching/babysitting Chloe prior to the time the video picks them up as they are walking over to that pillar. And, did they have a conversation immediately prior to leaving the H2O zone in the center of the deck? ....

@drama_farmer sbm for focus Yes, good question. I'd like to know too. And your list of ideas for possible attractions at window is excellent. Ditto possible SA & Chloe 'communications.'
Times per Complaint*
2:40 Mom & Chloe in pool
3:50 Mom (to RCL ofc?)
3:50 SA came to H20 Zone
___ ? Time gap? btwn end of SA-crouching-at-pillar vid, and start of their walking-to-window clip?
4:00 <---shortly after, Chloe walked to wall of glass, SA followed.
_:__?-- Complaint para 20, she slipped from SA's arms, but no time is given. Why not?
4:27 **<-- MSM dated July 9 "incident happened"

ASSuming, no time gap btwn end of SA-couching vid clip, and start of their walking-to-window clip, then if Complaint allegation times are accurate, SA supervised ~10 min.
BUT
ASSuming no time gap, & if July 9 MSM's 4:27 incident time is accurate, SA supervised ~ 40 min.

------------------------------------------------------------
*Complaint allegations, starting on page 3:
"Subject Incident
11. On or about July 7, 2019, at approximately 1:15 p.m., the family boarded the vessel in San Juan, Puerto Rico for a 7-night Southern Caribbean cruise. Upon boarding, the family went to the Windjammer Café for lunch. After lunch, Mrs. Schultz-Wiegand and Chloe changed into swimsuits, and at approximately 2:40 p.m., they began to play in the pool(s) aboard the ship.
12. At or around 3:50 p.m., Mrs. Schultz Wiegand needed to go help with an issue related to the cruise, and as such, Mr. Anello came up to the H2O Zone on Deck 11 of the vessel to supervise Chloe, his 18-month-old granddaughter, as shown below:
[ pic of Chloe]
13. The H2O Zone is advertised by Defendant to be a “kids’… water park[.]”
14. At all times material, Mr. Anello was closely supervising Chloe as she played in the kids’ water park. Shortly after 4 p.m., Chloe walked over to a nearby wall of glass on the same deck (Deck 11), and she was followed closely by Mr. Anello.'
** "The incident happened at 4:27; ship departed at 10.24pm." Grandad 'had to be sedated' after dropping toddler 150ft to her death on cruise ship. pub July 9.