Now the DM is touting their "exclusive', but it was on WS first!
We scooped MSM! Even without being the first, when big news is happening, WS is my go-to source for the best collection of MSM on the subject.
Now the DM is touting their "exclusive', but it was on WS first!
Probably because of this part:
"... including items for a new baby girl and a few boys t-shirts (for Chloe's brother?)which contained the message: "Chosen for me by my sister in Heaven"
Anyone on Twitter? And can tweet the story to CBS's David Begnaud?We scooped MSM! Even without being the first, when big news is happening, WS is my go-to source for the best collection of MSM on the subject.
Probably because of this part:
"... including items for a new baby girl and a few boys t-shirts (for Chloe's brother?)which contained the message: "Chosen for me by my sister in Heaven"
That message seems a bit much...I know the family is grieving, but a t shirt with that message seems to be too big of a burden for another child to bear imo of course.
But does what he "thought" matter at all? In a negligent homicide case, doesn't the prosecution need to establish what a "reasonably prudent person" would do/think? SA had no REASONABLE basis for his "thinking" - no reasonable person would think/assume that a clear open space must have glass and that there's no need to bother to check for the glass before lifting the baby and risking her life? Same with the colorblind excuse.
I imagine in a trial, SA could claim he's colorblind and assumed there was glass in front of his face. RCL would reply, that's fine Mr Anello, we believe everything you've said. None of that, even if true, matters at all. Because your actions while supervising Chloe fail to come close to meeting the standard of what a reasonably prudent person would do.
So my question is, to what extent does the "reasonably prudent person" standard nullify all of Anello's excuses?
Seems like mom and dad got on board thinking about “me” time not Chloe time... disaster.
They have a lot of "oopsing" to do, IMHO.
Makes me think of the Doobie Brothers song...IMO, it exonerates RCCL from any wrong doing or negligence.
My thoughts have always been that SA is going for "no negligence" on his part, either. You can't have a negligent homicide charge without negligence. IMO, in his mind, he was not negligent, because of what he thought.
Winkleman showed PEOPLE two grainy video clips of the tragedy. In one, Anello is seen propping Chloe up on the railing on her feet, then on her bottom, before she disappears from view. In another, Anello is seen dropping to the floor after Chloe falls out the window.
Video of Girl Falling to Death From Cruise Ship Exonerates Grandfather, Says Family’s Lawyer
I hope People also picks up the court filings
Winkleman is talking - see link above
In the Estsy liked list, along with the baby items and jewelry, there were photos of what looked looked framed maps of the Caribbean.I do worry about him. He was a half brother, and it would have been normal for him to feel a little jealousy, and a little bit left out, while Chloe was living, let alone this. I sure hope he has a good relationship and lots of time with his bio father. I'm sure he really needs time away from this situation.
He’s entitled to defend his clients - his statement just doesn’t acknowledge the evidence so he will continue to support the complaint IMOWould Winkleman's actions be enough to get him disbarred? I personally think he deserves to be disbarred but I don't know what the legal standard is. At the very least, I hope his reputation is destroyed after everyone has discovered the truth.
The Wiegands’ attorney Michael Winkleman issued this statement: