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

[mheido67]

It's been a while since I've sailed from San Juan, but I believe that embarkation takes place on deck 4 or 5 as it does in other locations.



Having been an EMT for 17 years, based on what was in the doctor's report, my guess is that people would be running away.



They do not embark at pier level, but on deck 4 or 5. As you said, the only people on the pier should have been workers.

Just to clarify, the doctor would have had access to the crew gangway several of which would have come directly off the pier onto deck 1. Passengers would use these to embark and disembark at ports of call during the cruise. Passengers embarking on that day in San Juan would do so on the elevated gangway from the cruise terminal building onto deck 5 as you noted JulieBEMT.

 

[mheido67]

Passengers who are in party mode and drinking too much would likely remove the screens and toss them overboard. Not to mention that screens would require continuous replacement because they would deteriorate quickly from salt and water.

And I loved the suggestion of installing fans! Yes, I’m gonna book an expensive cruise around the Caribbean so I can sit on a sealed up pool deck and listen to industrial strength fans blow air around! And of course let’s not consider the safety issue presented by dozens of spinning fan blades in a “children’s play area”. Oh lordie, don’t get me started with that nonsense.

 

[JulieBEMT]

Passengers who are in party mode and drinking too much would likely remove the screens and toss them overboard. Not to mention that screens would require continuous replacement because they would deteriorate quickly from salt and water.

Yeah. I would say the risk of someone being injured by a screen being knocked out is much greater than the risk of another person being stupid enough to dangle a kid out an open window.

Just to clarify, the doctor would have had access to the crew gangway several of which would have come directly off the pier onto deck 1. Passengers would use these to embark and disembark at ports of call during the cruise. Passengers embarking on that day in San Juan would do so on the elevated gangway from the cruise terminal building onto deck 5 as you noted JulieBEMT.

Thanks for clarifying. I forgot to mention that, and I'm sure many would not know.

And I loved the suggestion of installing fans! Yes, I’m gonna book an expensive cruise around the Caribbean so I can sit on a sealed up pool deck and listen to industrial strength fans blow air around! And of course let’s not consider the safety issue presented by dozens of spinning fan blades in a “children’s play area”. Oh lordie, don’t get me started with that nonsense.

Agree! Spinning fan blades or electrocution are far bigger risks than the open windows. Having gotten through law school, you would think KW would know this. So, either she's more book smart than life smart, or she's lying yet again!

 

[Moonracer]

That 'screens' suggestion is ridiculous. Window screens don't 'save' falling children. Screens will come right off if someone falls against them.

As a matter of fact, there were public health campaigns around 1990 where I lived in the East because so many children were dying from falling from open, screened windows. I can see another push to share that info is needed. Maybe through pediatrician offices would be good, even booths at grocery stores.

OT but important.

 

[Midwestmom2019]

OT but M Winkleman in the Washington Post about “hearing from people” in Japanese Port being quarantined due to corona virus on board a Princess ship. Maybe he’ll get busy with new cases and this one falls by the wayside. Where it should fall.

ETA. https://apple.news/AqMGseQnqTdi_QqDMxlQgkg
Got it.

 

[Wicked Strong]

Well, the mother claims there are "a million" things the cruise line could do to make the cruise ships "safer" like having fans instead of open windows. Lol. Seriously?? I can imagine at least a dozen reasons why that's a stupid idea. Oh and one of the grandmothers said she couldn't understand why the windows didnt have screens on them. Lol.

I wonder how these people manage to survive a day without the world protecting them from their own stupidity.

<sarcasm alert> maybe i should sue the envelope manufacturer for the paper cut i got on my tongue last week. UGH

I had read they wanted the windows changed to only open 4 inches - apparently another cruise ship has these windows and they thought they should be incorporated in this ship.

I spent 10 days in Germany this summer, during an (apparently) unseasonably hot week. Our hotel had air conditioning but we didn't know it is regulated to only cool the room down a few degrees. We had long windows that opened with no screens, but they only opened outward a few inches. It was not enough to make a difference in allowing cool temperatures into our room.

 

[HRH Phoebe Cat]

Well, for people supposedly so educated and intelligent and in LE and the judicial system, there is absolutely no acknowledgement that taking a toddler or child on a cruise is inherently dangerous in and of itself. It does not matter to me if they were on a Disney cruise previously. No environment is 100% safe for a toddler or child and, apparently, some adults. No, there is no way that RCCL could have reasonably foreseen SA’s actions.

My two nephews were climbers. My sister still makes references to how they “frosted my hair for me.” No way in the world would she have even considered a cruise. Had anything happened, she would have blamed herself until the end of time....

 

[Yellowbeak]

I believe he was in the infirmary when he was told there was an emergency on the pier. The infirmary is on deck 1 which is also where the gangway would be so he could have gotten there within minutes. Of course there would have been security on the pier while boarding was taking place so they would have cleared people from the area. With a set sail time of 8pm they would most certainly have still been boarding passengers at 4pm I'd think.

Whoa! You just made me realize something... they were not “ in port” per se but we’re embarking! On that side of the ship! If the embarkation time was 8 then I would imagine there were many many people on the gangway. I haven’t been on Freedom of the seas but on Oasis it seems like we load at mid ship on deck 5. A steady line of people. I would guess people saw her fall while entering the ship. JMO

 

[HRH Phoebe Cat]

“Anyway, so sorry, Mrs X, I guess I am saying to you that, at the end of the day, I hold you responsible. Mr Z was not a newcomer in your mother’s life; you have some idea as to his true character or suspicions at the least. You really think we don’t notice how Mr Z just nonchalantly shambled after Jane even when so well out of arm’s reach much less holding her or her hand. Personally, the only haste or sense of urgency I noticed was when he lifted your sweet baby girl up and over to her death.
Whatever the reasons are that you cannot accept your own guilt, negligence or culpability in asking Mr Z to look after Sweet Baby Jane, that is on you. It is not ‘the ship’s fault’ in this case.”

This is just a “fictional” fantasy of what one might say to this woman if this were some mystery/thriller thing. Just my own thoughts and opinions. Thanks for listening.

Bonus points if you get the James Taylor reference...his song, “Sweet Baby James.” For our *cough, aging myself here* younger and international members who may not be familiar with it.

 

[MsMarple]

I had read they wanted the windows changed to only open 4 inches - apparently another cruise ship has these windows and they thought they should be incorporated in this ship.

I spent 10 days in Germany this summer, during an (apparently) unseasonably hot week. Our hotel had air conditioning but we didn't know it is regulated to only cool the room down a few degrees. We had long windows that opened with no screens, but they only opened outward a few inches. It was not enough to make a difference in allowing cool temperatures into our room.

Well, if RCCL limits window openings to 4" then I'm sure we'll see lawsuits from people who passed out during their cruise in freakin' July in PR. Mo' money mo' money.

Seriously though, you make a great point.

 

[BeachSky]

OT but M Winkleman in the Washington Post about “hearing from people” in Japanese Port being quarantined due to corona virus on board a Princess ship. Maybe he’ll get busy with new cases and this one falls by the wayside. Where it should fall.

ETA. https://apple.news/AqMGseQnqTdi_QqDMxlQgkg
Got it.

He wants people to not be alarmed and keep cruising....
because after all....he sues Cruise Ships for a living !


MOO

 

[katydid23]

As a matter of fact, there were public health campaigns around 1990 where I lived in the East because so many children were dying from falling from open, screened windows. I can see another push to share that info is needed. Maybe through pediatrician offices would be good, even booths at grocery stores.

OT but important.

Yes, I remember that campaign. My kids were toddlers then. I remember a few tragic cases of babies falling out windows after leaning against the screens. They give a false sense of security when they are actually very flimsy.

Which is why that suggestion about window screens making the cruise safer is pathetic. JMO

 

[katydid23]

Well, if RCCL limits window openings to 4" then I'm sure we'll see lawsuits from people who passed out during their cruise in freakin' July in PR. Mo' money mo' money.

Seriously though, you make a great point.

Also, if there is a fire or a flood on the deck, or if the ship is going down, I WANT AN OPEN WINDOW to climb out of. 4 inches ain't gonna do it...

 

[neesaki]

KW's statement at one of their press conferences has always bothered me: "Sam would never, ever put our kids in danger". Um, he did put your daughter in danger, as evidenced by the fact that she's dead. Since KW seems to do almost all of the talking at their press conferences and interviews, I'm assuming she's running the show, but I don't understand why AW is going along with the "SA is innocent of any wrong-doing" narrative. Since he's in LE, like you, surely he must realize, from a professional standpoint, that what SA did was incredibly reckless and dangerous.

Exactly . Reckless, dangerous, not to mention, isn’t child abuse against the law? Chloe was being emotionally and physically abused when SA treated her like nothing and chose to put her life in danger...to the point of her death. Why is it there aren’t more charges than negligent homicide. Should CPS not have been involved?

Also, he made a conscious and proactive choice when he did what he did to Chloe. I think that’s why so many have come to the conclusion that the most likely explanation is, that he purposely threw her off the boat. Because it’s very hard to rationalize his actions in any other way. Any other explanation is too unbelievable. Jmo

Justice for Chloe

 

[HRH Phoebe Cat]

Exactly . Reckless, dangerous, not to mention, isn’t child abuse against the law? Chloe was being emotionally and physically abused when SA treated her like nothing and chose to put her life in danger...to the point of her death. Why is it there aren’t more charges than negligent homicide. Should CPS not have been involved?

Also, he made a conscious and proactive choice when he did what he did to Chloe. I think that’s why so many have come to the conclusion that the most likely explanation is, that he purposely threw her off the boat. Because it’s very hard to rationalize his actions in any other way. Any other explanation is too unbelievable. Jmo

Justice for Chloe

@neesaki hits the nail on the head. Thank you!

#TeamChloe

 

[neesaki]

He wants people to not be alarmed and keep cruising....
because after all....he sues Cruise Ships for a living !


MOO

HaHa, think he wants to be an analyst aka a CNN or FOX news contributor? Is he liberal or conservative.. doubt it matters, IYKWIM.

 

[justice4allnow]

Seven months have passed since Chloe's death. When it first happened, I thought that if the parents believed Sam's story, it was because they couldn't bear to basically lose two members of their family at once. Chloe had just passed and if they didn't believe Sam innocent, they would have to reject him, thus losing him too. But now that time has passed, everyone connected will be feeling very differently than they did at first. The immediate shock has passed, everyone has thought it over, seen the videos, read and talked about it. By now probably only Patti still stands behind him, and even she may have doubts. If Kim and Al are not blaming Sam now, I can only assume that they are complicit in what happened. Sam is either a fool or evil...or... several of them are evil.

 

[al66pine]

Crim Charge? CPS?

... Reckless, dangerous, not to mention, isn’t child abuse against the law? Chloe was being emotionally and physically abused when SA treated her like nothing and chose to put her life in danger...to the point of her death. Why is it there aren’t more charges than negligent homicide. Should CPS not have been involved? ....

@neesaki sbm I may be reading your comments too literally & maybe they are meant rhetorically, but here goes:
1. Why not more than Neg Hom charge?
Because that's the charge PR prosecutors thought they would be able to prove at trial & get a conviction for. If prosecutors thought they could prove a higher charge, SA would be charged w it, imo. Even if they had boatloads of evd re 'motive,' for higher charges,prosecutors would need to evd of SA's intent which is very hard to prove.
2. CPS 'Before?'
Altho some here suspect/believe SA may have played 'airplane game' or dangled Chloe in mid-air, etc. before July, AFAIK, we have seen no reports from anyone who witnessed him doing this before then. If it had happened & if a witness reported to IN CPS at that time, IDK how/what CPS would/might have done. It's possible someone contacted IN CPS to report abuse or neglect of Chloe, by SA or others. There could have been an IN CPS investigation - either open or closed - but if so, at this point CPS is extreeemely unlikely to publicly release any info to the public. Virtually certain no public release, unless SA's prior actions re Chloe were to surface and be admissible at trial imo.
3. Involving CPS in This Instance?
In this instance/SA's actions on board ship for ~ 30+ sec's, by the time anyone could have phoned PR CPS, it was too late for CPS to be 'involved,' as, sadly, Chloe was dead.
jmo

 

[al66pine]

Wannabe News Analyst? Or?

HaHa, think he wants to be an analyst aka a CNN or FOX news contributor? Is he liberal or conservative.. doubt it matters, IYKWIM.

@neesaki That very well could be. OTOH, maybe he just wants more airtime & higher public name recognition without paying for it. jmo

 

[they'll get you]

Yeah. I would say the risk of someone being injured by a screen being knocked out is much greater than the risk of another person being stupid enough to dangle a kid out an open window.



Thanks for clarifying. I forgot to mention that, and I'm sure many would not know.



Agree! Spinning fan blades or electrocution are far bigger risks than the open windows. Having gotten through law school, you would think KW would know this. So, either she's more book smart than life smart, or she's lying yet again!

Or it’s Winkleman wanting another feather in his cap like the duty lifeguards he won.