IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #7

[justice4allnow]

Winkleman came out swinging so strongly on this one, right out the gate, he really didn't leave any room for negotiation with RCCL. He was talking to international press right after. He quickly hustled the parents on to GMA where Kim blamed RCCL and a dozen adorable photos of Chloe were published. There was no way the cruise line could have quietly settled after all the hoopla. Which makes me wonder if he ever really was looking to settle this case. He knows the Wiegands cannot win... but figures, so what! When all of this incredible publicity showcasing HIM is available, when HE can play White Knight to the family...what does it matter if the family stays in this agonizing fight for however long it takes before dismissal or an unfavorable verdict for the Wiegands, he is getting to be a household name!

 

[al66pine]

As Such?
"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, ..." bbm from Complaint, page 3.
This wording keeps nagging at me What is "as such" referring to? Doesn't seem to refer to anything. Why is that phrase included? Because it seems like it could be an innocuous mistake, am I ascribing greater meaning than it merits?

 

[katydid23]

Agreed. Does anyone understand MW's strategy? Why the huge investment in trying to sway public opinion, if that's what he really is doing? Why does it matter?

I think because if public opinion was all 100% behind the Wiegand family, RCCL would feel pressured to make a deal and pay them off, without a trial.

 

[IceIce9]

Where would the doll be if he straightened his arms ?
Yes, out the window!


View attachment 228653

And he should be holding a toddler doll the same size and weight as Chloe.

 

[justbreathe]

Exactly this! It's a PT Barnum style of self-promotion, that "there's no such thing as bad publicity." I think he knows that this one is not going to go his way...but he still has more time to be on TV, in newspapers, magazines and social media. He couldn't afford to buy the kind of publicity he's getting-millions of people know his name and face now. The Wiegands probably have been led to believe that they are doing something noble that will also result in lifetime financial security -but all that is really happening is that this guy is getting free publicity. How very sad. Because of TOS I will not say what I really think about this man.

I suspect, as *first and foremost* an officer of the court, behind the scenes MW is trying to dissuade the Wiegands. Pointing out the public sentiment and that this is what they will need to overcome. Showing them the sad reenactment, which basically works against them. Pointing out that SA is fighting a criminal case and should maybe focus on that? That this case will be an uphill battle made worse of SA is convicted.

 

[WiseGuy]

As Such?
"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, ..." bbm from Complaint, page 3.
This wording keeps nagging at me What is "as such" referring to? Doesn't seem to refer to anything. Why is that phrase included? Because it seems like it could be an innocuous mistake, am I ascribing greater meaning than it merits?

Yes, it is an awkward use of the phrase, I guess not glaring enough to have been caught in proof-reading. A simple “therefore” would have been better. Just be happy there’s no “irregardless” in the document!

 

[JerseySleuth17]

I suspect, as *first and foremost* an officer of the court, behind the scenes MW is trying to dissuade the Wiegands. Pointing out the public sentiment and that this is what they will need to overcome. Showing them the sad reenactment, which basically works against them. Pointing out that SA is fighting a criminal case and should maybe focus on that? That this case will be an uphill battle made worse of SA is convicted.

I can almost guarantee MW is not trying to dissuade them from this case. The only way I will ever believe that is if he actually withdraws as their legal counsel. They see big $$$ in relation to the work involved and they aren't going anywhere. If anything they are probably trying to convince the family they have a right to be so indignant and how dare RCCL not have stickers warning people a window is open!! Seriously (some) lawyers are VERY sleazy and will do anything no matter how unlikely it is they could win. If there's enough of a chance of winning or a settlement relative to the effort/cost put in, they will take on the case. No one is paying these lawyers out of pocket, this most certainly is a contingency fee agreement so they are highly motivated to either win in court or eek out a settlement from RCCL b/c that's how they are going to get paid. I suspect they are somewhat dismayed and surprised at how aggressive RCCL is in NOT wanting to settle. The reason the whole "doll" recreation was so lame and unbelievable I suspect is that they put the least amount of time, money and effort into it that they could. These are not exactly legal eagles here. The recreation would be completely blown apart by RCCL's lawyers in an actual courtroom. Another part of the problem is the public is not very sympathetic to this case. The vast majority of people think SA is a reckless moron. I think they're going to have a tough time winning this and from what I'm seeing RCCL is not inclined to settle. I think the cruise line has more facts up their sleeve that make it even worse for SA - maybe explain why he refused a breathalyzer, for example.

 

[they'll get you]

Agreed. Does anyone understand MW's strategy? Why the huge investment in trying to sway public opinion, if that's what he really is doing? Why does it matter?

Public perception would be extremely important to RCC and MW would be hoping for a few of $mil is nothing to RCC.
Imo RCC have been gracious throughout this and imo it’s only upped their credibility.
I feel even more loyal towards RCC at the moment because of the twisting of the truth.

 

[justbreathe]

As Such?
"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, ..." bbm from Complaint, page 3.
This wording keeps nagging at me What is "as such" referring to? Doesn't seem to refer to anything. Why is that phrase included? Because it seems like it could be an innocuous mistake, am I ascribing greater meaning than it merits?

Either just word salad meant to sound officious and scholarly, in as much as adding a muchly amount of obscure and irrelevant words to the narrative of which he is retelling in a legal document can make it less likely, less probable that the reader will read closely enough to catch some pertinent details that are best left obscured from the writer’s point of view.

Baha!

Or, more likely, started off as something like, “...[the person whose credit was used], or [someone from room 7] was needed, and as such, Mrs. Wiegand went and Mr. Anello went up to the H3O Zone...”

Or, ...”Mrs. Wiegand needed to go help with an issue and asked if anyone wasn’t busy, and as such, Mr. Anello went up to the H3O Zone...”

They are trying to obscure something related to why KW left, and how SA came to be in charge of her. Notice how we hear nothing of how this baby safe with mom in the pool, came to be in the arms of a fully clothed man in front of an open window with mom no where in sight.

(Also, just noticed dig at RCL again - if RCL had not called upon KW about a “cruise issue” she would still be here.)

 

[justbreathe]

I can almost guarantee MW is not trying to dissuade them from this case. The only way I will ever believe that is if he actually withdraws as their legal counsel. They see big $$$ in relation to the work involved and they aren't going anywhere. If anything they are probably trying to convince the family they have a right to be so indignant and how dare RCCL not have stickers warning people a window is open!! Seriously (some) lawyers are VERY sleazy and will do anything no matter how unlikely it is they could win. If there's enough of a chance of winning or a settlement relative to the effort/cost put in, they will take on the case. No one is paying these lawyers out of pocket, this most certainly is a contingency fee agreement so they are highly motivated to either win in court or eek out a settlement from RCCL b/c that's how they are going to get paid. I suspect they are somewhat dismayed and surprised at how aggressive RCCL is in NOT wanting to settle. The reason the whole "doll" recreation was so lame and unbelievable I suspect is that they put the least amount of time, money and effort into it that they could. These are not exactly legal eagles here. The recreation would be completely blown apart by RCCL's lawyers in an actual courtroom. Another part of the problem is the public is not very sympathetic to this case. The vast majority of people think SA is a reckless moron. I think they're going to have a tough time winning this and from what I'm seeing RCCL is not inclined to settle. I think the cruise line has more facts up their sleeve that make it even worse for SA - maybe explain why he refused a breathalyzer, for example.

I'm not sure about this. I imagine at one of these status conferences with just the lawyers, the judge will say, “Have your clients seen the video? It seems compelling.” “Your clients are aware the simultaneous criminal prosecution will impact this case?” “Your clients are aware their chances of prevailing are xx%.”

MW says “yes, I have advised my clients and they wish to proceed.”

Judge sighs the BIG sigh. “Ok, let’s set the next conference at xxdate.”

And MW can’t just leave the case now because he feels like it. He is stuck with it, even though it is a loser. Get all the publicity you can because the judge isn’t discharging MW if he wants to leave or not. MW brought the case, and short of being fired by the Wiegands (which he might want at some point, move on to greener pastures) he is on this case to the end.

He has to represent his clients vigorously. But he has to know they have no chance, and has to tell his clients that. Publicly, MW will never waver. Private might be different. ME can’t alienate the entire court system in his own backyard tilting at this windmill. And he won’t.

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

I saw a similar analogy on Reddit which I thought was a good one - say SA forgot CW in a hot car and she died. The entire family forgives him immediately, then turns around and 8 days after her death files papers to begin the process of suing the car manufacturer because really it's the manufacturer's fault for not having a warning or alarm to remind SA to get the kid out of the car. This is the same twisted logic they are using to sue RCCL. But the facts here are even worse, CW was perfectly safe until SA lifted her up over a safety railing and held her out over it, window or no window is besides the point - if he had left her on the floor, or behind the safety railing, she would be alive.

BBM - why haven't the car manufacturers developed this. Or even the car seat people? They're missing a huge market.

 

[justbreathe]

BBM - why haven't the car manufacturers developed this. Or even the car seat people? They're missing a huge market.

I believe they have, it just isn’t widely available yet

 

[mheido67]

As Such?
"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, ..." bbm from Complaint, page 3.
This wording keeps nagging at me What is "as such" referring to? Doesn't seem to refer to anything. Why is that phrase included? Because it seems like it could be an innocuous mistake, am I ascribing greater meaning than it merits?

"That being the case..." would have been better wording but that's basically what they meant.

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

Yes, it is an awkward use of the phrase, I guess not glaring enough to have been caught in proof-reading. A simple “therefore” would have been better. Just be happy there’s no “irregardless” in the document!

As a former legal secretary, it almost reads to me like there was something else in there, like a further explanation or how she contacted SA and it was struck and the as such probably made sense in the longer sentence.

 

[JerseySleuth17]

I'm not sure about this. I imagine at one of these status conferences with just the lawyers, the judge will say, “Have your clients seen the video? It seems compelling.” “Your clients are aware the simultaneous criminal prosecution will impact this case?” “Your clients are aware their chances of prevailing are xx%.”

MW says “yes, I have advised my clients and they wish to proceed.”

Judge sighs the BIG sigh. “Ok, let’s set the next conference at xxdate.”

And MW can’t just leave the case now because he feels like it. He is stuck with it, even though it is a loser. Get all the publicity you can because the judge isn’t discharging MW if he wants to leave or not. MW brought the case, and short of being fired by the Wiegands (which he might want at some point, move on to greener pastures) he is on this case to the end.

He has to represent his clients vigorously. But he has to know they have no chance, and has to tell his clients that. Publicly, MW will never waver. Private might be different. ME can’t alienate the entire court system in his own backyard tilting at this windmill. And he won’t.

The criminal case will be over before the civil case gets to court. The outcome of the criminal case may impact the family's desire to move forward with the civil case, and certainly would help RCCL's position if SA is found criminally negligent, but ultimately the civil case centers around whether RC had any duty to warn passengers about open windows, and RC's defense is no because SA did something reckless, and the family's position is he's elderly (lol) and color-blind and infirm and it's reasonable to put such a warning. If a judge could stop frivolous lawsuits or lawsuits with .0001% chance of winning from ever going to trial we would have a lot less activity in the courts. Ultimately I don't even think MW even wants to actually TRY this case he just wants to shakedown RCCL for a payout -unfortunately it's not going the way he thought it would RCCL is not settling to just make this go away - because imo this isn't even a close call, SA did something stupid and reckless and it's his fault.

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

When the lawyers would revise a brief or pleading on paper, it would come back looking like a crime scene.

I hate red pens to this day.

 

[al66pine]

Doll's Weight & Torso Size?

And he should be holding a toddler doll the same size and weight as Chloe.

@IceIce9 Yes. Yes. Yes.
If the man had been holding a doll w Chloe's proportions & weighing 20-22 lb, those pix would have looked different. So different, they might have might have actually looked like Chloe at window. Why, almost like a reenactment?

--------------------------------------------
From a quick glance at a growth chart, seems -
--- Chloe would have been ~ 30-32 inches tall, like the 32 inch doll
--- Chloe would have been ~ 20- 22 lbs, much heavier than doll.

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

I was looking at RCCL leadership to see if maybe there was a change in leadership which would account for the change in stance on settling.

But CEO has been there since the earth was new and the general counsel has been there since 2006.

 

[they'll get you]

If it was urgent mum would’ve bundled up Chloe and taken her. It wasn’t urgent for her to leave.
It might have been a simple toilet break.

Imo.

 

[JerseySleuth17]

If it was urgent mum would’ve bundled up Chloe and taken her. It wasn’t urgent for her to leave.
It might have been a simple toilet break.

Imo.

I honestly find it a little strange that he was all alone with CW. The ship had not even left the port yet, which means they had not done the lifevest drill. There were 4 adults and 2 kids on this cruise. At a minimum I would have thought CW would be with wherever her older brother was and whomever was watching them. And where was grandma, she came on the cruise with SA as her partner. How did a party of 6 get separated enough that the baby wound up all alone with SA and 15 minutes later she is dead? Even if the mom had to take care of something at the guest services desk, and grandma went with her, where was dad? This all just seems so odd to me.