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

[BeachSky]

I feel certain that there were witnesses at the scene and that they have been interviewed by LE and could testify during a trial. There was, allegedly, someone who actually told SA not to do what he was doing - holding Chloe up to an open window 11 stories above the ground. I don't know if it was passengers or crew/staff members, but there were definitely witnesses to SA's actions. Hopefully, LE interviewed anyone who was at the location of the "accident" and that they reported to local authorities exactly what they saw and heard when SA hoisted Chloe up to the open window and lost his grip on her, causing her to plunge 11 stories to her death on the concrete pier.

There was, allegedly, someone who actually told SA not to do what he was doing -

I remember that from the original thread!

 

[katydid23]

I find these two photos interesting. In the first what’s missing? The doll, that’s what. Because if it was there it would be clear that CW could have been standing at SA’s feet right up against the glass while he looked down at her. Safely on the floor.

The second photo I’m shocked that they included as it shows that SA literally put CW feet on the open window sill. Previously I had assumed only that he held her on the railing and she lurched forward. Now it appears he literally stood her on the window frame. And still, he somehow was oblivious to the lack of glass?

And on the 2nd picture, it is very obvious, that if he had placed the child standing on the ledge like that, IF the window was closed, it would have been impossible to stAnd her there. Her toes would have been up against the glass, as would her face. Look at the closed window beside them.

There would have been NO ROOM to stand her up there.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

View attachment 227658

The puple line is mine but otherwise untouched.

This photo keeps bothering me. There's something... odd about the tape measure. Most of the numbers are illegible for me but the ones below his fingers are still dark and defined enough that you can make out enough to work out measurements. But once you get above his fingers the tape seems to squish and distort. Is he physically bending the tape back to make it look like they're the same height from the front??? Why does it suddenly seem to get narrow?

It’s not level vertically. Look at the red line in the left. It’s straight up. If you were to measure every few inches or so with a horizontal level, the higher the tape measure, the further it pulls away from level to the right. So at floor level let’s say it’s two feet. As you move up it would slowly spread out from two feet, to 2.2 ft, 2.3 2.4. So at head level the tape is several inches wider from the red line to the tape measure than two feet. EDA: that adds a couple of inches to height.
Twisting the tape adds to miscalculations.
EDA: Look closely at the red dot on the bottom of the red line. If you move across horizontally, AND level, notice the tape measure is several inches further back. So the 71 inches is more like 68 inches. That’s why the guy had to be lifted up the 7 inches from the floor in another shot. He’s way shorter than SA. They added at the top. And the bottom. Hahahaha. Ok Winkleman. Gotcha. Optical illusions? Nah.

Really cheap recreation. Like his other attempts. I would think that he could afford animation superimposed on the subject in the pink shirt.

EDA again! Any carpenter will tell you measure twice, cut once. And here’s a great example of measuring gone wrong.

 

[BeachSky]

View attachment 227658

The puple line is mine but otherwise untouched.

This photo keeps bothering me. There's something... odd about the tape measure. Most of the numbers are illegible for me but the ones below his fingers are still dark and defined enough that you can make out enough to work out measurements. But once you get above his fingers the tape seems to squish and distort. Is he physically bending the tape back to make it look like they're the same height from the front??? Why does it suddenly seem to get narrow?

Confusing tape measure FOG ?
If you can’t beat ‘em ....confuse ‘em.

MOO

 

[katydid23]

There was, allegedly, someone who actually told SA not to do what he was doing -

I remember that from the original thread!

That's why they had to use that silly teen bikini doll....if they used a life size toddler doll, those reenactment photos would have looked SHOCKING to one's senses.

 

[JulieBEMT]

I honestly cannot even read Wink's filings at all anymore. Everything that comes from him is just so ridiculous it makes me want to spit. At this stage, I just hope Royal Caribbean takes off the gloves and puts him down on the mat!

 

[katydid23]

To me it looks like she's sitting on his knee. Those seats where they are look very close to the glass (the next ones where the rink curves not so much) and with her perched on the end of his knee she's still not in a very stable position leaning forward, but as you said, he has her around her middle so she shouldn't fall there. But even still, as you said, she's not standing on a rail in any way comparable to the way he put her on the window ledge

My son used to play hockey---and I would NEVER place a young child right up close to that glass.

Even though it is designed 'never' to break, it DOES sometimes shatter. That would be a very dangerous place to sit a tiny child on your lap.

 

[katydid23]

Imo an accident has happened and RCC will have some blame......SA had the ability to drop Chloe out.

He’d have the ability to drop Chloe over any one of the other railings onboard as well but that’s not the point.
Unfortunately.

I don't think that RCC will have to have some blame, even though SA had the ability to drop the baby out.

A company cannot prevent EVERY single horrid incident, IF THE PASSENGER BREAKS ALL OF THE SAFETY RULES. If the passenger is reckless and criminally negligent, the company will not always share the blame.

If I go on a roller coaster and I unlock my restraints and stand up on the seat, then fall out, is that the Carnival's fault? If the belted me in and I was told to stay in the seat and keep my arms inside, etc....How can they be found responsible for my recklessness?

Maybe If I was drunk and they allowed me to ride? But otherwise, how could they know I was going to do something so foolish and irresponsibly dangerous?

I don't think they should be held responsible for such an irresponsible, unpredictable action by a grandfather.

 

[TDoc72]

SA returns to court next Monday, January 27. Let's see if he has changed his mind about accepting a plea deal.

He should. I think he’s going to be found guilty. One good reason would be that his family wouldn’t be able to visit him all the time. Puerto Rico is far from Indiana.

 

[justice4allnow]

And on the 2nd picture, it is very obvious, that if he had placed the child standing on the ledge like that, IF the window was closed, it would have been impossible to stAnd her there. Her toes would have been up against the glass, as would her face. Look at the closed window beside them.

There would have been NO ROOM to stand her up there.

That's why Mr Winkleman used that tall, very skinny adult doll. If he had used a realistic toddler doll, like the Reborn Toddler Doll, it could not have fit on that ledge with the window closed.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Winkleman demands non-existent footage:
Royal Caribbean’s agreement to provide us with additional footage, “to the extent it exists” is not enough for us.
Yeah, the existing footage isn't enough to prove their case, so Winkleman can only win with non-existent fairytale footage.

 

[sl222]

And on the 2nd picture, it is very obvious, that if he had placed the child standing on the ledge like that, IF the window was closed, it would have been impossible to stAnd her there. Her toes would have been up against the glass, as would her face. Look at the closed window beside them.

There would have been NO ROOM to stand her up there.

That's a great point.

 

[justice4allnow]

This is in the filing:
"Due to the distance between Mr. Anello standing at the wooden rail and the glass pane 18 inches in front of him, it was not apparent to Mr. Anello that the glass pane in front of him was, in fact, a window that had been slid all the way open so that there was no glass at all in the single frame in front of him."
But we know that is inaccurate- because when a window is slid open, a piece of it, including the handle, is still in the open space. I'll look for one of the older photos that have already been shared earlier, that demonstrate it.

 

[Wehwalt]

MW uses some very strong, inflammatory wording in those documents. RCCL has been very discreet during the past 6 months. Only after the lawsuit was filed by the Wiegand did RCCL respond, as they are compelled to do.
I believe RCCL is going to alter their stance going forward, and this whole case is going to get uglier than it already is.
I am not in the legal field, but MW seems to me to be really pushing the envelope regarding legality and morality.

The lawyer is there to zealously represent their client. And the lawyer is an officer of the court with certain responsibilities to it. Add to it that this case is being fought in the court of public opinion as well as at the federal courthouse. I wouldn't expect action against MW by the court soon.

I was more struck by the emails between the lawyers. The reason MW's firm filed the motion when the defense was quite willing to turn over the video was that MW firm would not agree to them being turned over "to the extent they exist". Unless there's something being said beyond the plain meaning of the language, that's a pretty thin reason to waste the court's time with a motion.

 

[MsMarple]

To me it looks like she's sitting on his knee. Those seats where they are look very close to the glass (the next ones where the rink curves not so much) and with her perched on the end of his knee she's still not in a very stable position leaning forward, but as you said, he has her around her middle so she shouldn't fall there. But even still, as you said, she's not standing on a rail in any way comparable to the way he put her on the window ledge

Jumping ahead here and thank you so much @Kindred for posting the docs!

I don't know why Winkleman is including these pics and description of SA holding Chloe to the glass at a hockey game. The only purpose it serves IMO is that Chloe looked through or possibly banged on the glass at her brother's hockey games. Does that somehow explain or excuse SA's actions on the ship? IMO if that's the sum total reason of why SA put Chloe on that rail then good luck. It does nothing to explain why he didn't let Chloe bang on the lower glass nor does it explain why he chose to sit her on the railing which was not intended for sitting on.

So... the family's argument is that SA wanted Chloe to bang on the ship's window, that he didn't know it was open because he's colorblind and too far away to see the open window because of that gosh darn railing in the way? And RCCL failed to put a decal on the open window (i.e. "air") to warn him? Well knock me over with a feather.

And ETA: The doctor received a report of the accident at 4:04. SA took charge of Chloe at 3:50 according to the complaint. So less than 15 minutes in SA's care and Chloe was dead. Sickening.

 

[MsMarple]

Totally agree ', accurate reenactment ' it certainly was not . Original CCTV shows SA tucked into rail with his torso bent . And when holding Chloe doll reenactment guy's head can be seen meaning his body is rigid almost straight up and down . SA again is pressed against railing leaning over .
ABM , SA 's bum is not sticking out like reenactment guy either

RBBM
Yeah, that guy sticking his bum out and standing a good 6 or 8 inches from the blue line in front of the lower sill really pissed me off. That's nowhere close to SA's stance. I suppose he did it that way because otherwise he could have gotten his head against or out of the window. SMH.

 

[BeachSky]

Winkleman demands non-existent footage:
Royal Caribbean’s agreement to provide us with additional footage, “to the extent it exists” is not enough for us.
Yeah, the existing footage isn't enough to prove their case, so Winkleman can only win with non-existent fairytale footage.

Yeah he wants footage from the 2 speakers ...lol.

 

[MsMarple]

Does anyone else find it ironic that Winkleman included this as part of his documentation of warnings on the ship?

Another bit of irony. The final picture on page 13 happened to include an open window in the shot. Could it be any more obvious that the window was open? My arrow.


Wiegand Prelim Response to Dismiss 3.pdf

 

[they'll get you]

Another bit of irony. The final picture on page 13 happened to include an open window in the shot. Could it be any more obvious that the window was open?

View attachment 227685
Wiegand Prelim Response to Dismiss 3.pdf

Lovin' that.

 

[SoCalDavidS]

What kind of BS is Daily Mail trying to pull? Are they in bed with the Wiegands and their corrupt attorney?

Latest article says the following..."They say there was not a single sign, decal or safety notice alerting Anello that the window he was lifting Chloe up against so she could bang on the glass as she loved to do at her older brother's ice hockey games, could be slid open: a breach of industry-wide safety laws."