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

[they'll get you]

I see a gangway/ramp and many people walking.
I’m trying to figure out if it’s the Coroners van or passengers boarding the ship? Witnesses??
The same little tents are where passengers reboard from sightseeing.



affidavit of expert randall jaques.pdf

 

[al66pine]

Report. Relevant Only re RCL's Motion to Dismiss?

I don't believe plaintiffs intend to introduce photographs of the Barbados re-enactment at trial. Their purpose in my view is to get the plaintiffs by the motion to dismiss. Had it been SA in the pictures that would be quite another matter but I don't think we will ever see SA set foot on a RCCI ship. Just because they've been submitted for the motion does not make them trial evidence.

For evidence to be introduced, it must have some probative value and I do not see where this does. That does not mean that pictures from the Barbados view cannot be introduced to depict the scene, just ones of the guy. I don't expect them to try, if this gets that far.

@Wehwalt bbm
Sorry to be dense, but how can Inspection report "get by" RCL's Mo/Dis?
Do you think if SA had appeared in photos, pix would have (any/more?) probative value now? Or for possible intro at civil trial (which you think is not going to take place)?
"That does not mean that pictures from the Barbados view cannot be introduced to depict the scene, just ones of the guy."
Depicting the scene? Sorry I'm not following. Seems virtually all the pix depict a part of ship-scene. So those w 'the guy' (Margulies or Jaques?) would not be admissible? Or would be?
"I don't expect them to try, if this gets that far."
So maybe this report is just a publicity prop, so MSM describes it at 100+ page report, as tho there is relevant, material info, photos, measurements, etc.?
Rushing off for caffeine and then back to reread ^ post. I'm overlooking something.

 

[Chikkamma]

@Chikkamma
^ Proof that SA is an actor? Yes.
Proof of being a good actor? Nope.
Just as well. Some might be reluctant to doubt a good actor.
Great find, thanks for (re)posting.

But he played farmer Hamilton Hock in the Court House dinner theater production of "Let's Get Hitched". Isn’t that proof enough?

 

[they'll get you]

I can’t see through the smoke and mirrors.
What is this jargon??? A securely held baby can’t fall unless it’s dropped.

However, the maritime attorney explained Anello did not drop the girl, but she fell through an open glass pane that should have been closed securely.

'She Goes To Bang On The Glass And Next Thing She's Gone': Miami Attorney On Death Of Toddler On Royal Caribbean's Freedom Of The Seas

 

[they'll get you]

When I first heard a child had fallen overboard I envisioned an 8-10 year old from over a room balcony.

Then when I heard it was a baby and saw those windows I immediately thought wth ‘HOW?’ as we’ve sailed on RCC 5 times and know those windows reasonably well, that’s when my hinky meter climbed.

Before I started with Websleuths back in 2012 I was naive, really naive because I never realised that so much conniving evil walked this earth and I’m continually taken aback so now I’m naturally suspicious.

Winkleman was hired extremely early and I wonder if mum knew (of) him through her line of work. I read an early article where winkleman said he was hired to stop the rumours flying around on the internet. Only the rumours?

When the jury does decide it will be big news not only here in Australia.

 

[JerseySleuth17]

Yes, he did seem to be avoiding making eye contact, then he would try to sob, but no tears? Either he was out of tears (can you ever not be able to cry), or he was acting.

MOO

YES and if you notice also when the interviewer asked him how was he holding CW, he was very reluctant to answer that question, and then he basically goes on to admit at one point he was only holding her by ONE HAND because he was raising the other hand up to "bang on the glass". So 11 stories up, without checking, and definitely with a breeze coming through, he leans forward? I honestly think he knew the window was open and was going to play a trick on CW by "banging on glass" and then the poor girl would realize there was no glass, but she freaked out or jerked and this idiot dropped her out an open window. 100% his fault.

And also in the same interview, he says something like he watched her fall the whole way down, but almost immediately after she fell he falls to the floor, so I'm not even sure THAT statement is true. He 100% knew that window was open and then at one point he only holds her with one arm. And these parents are still blaming the cruise line and not him. If I was RCCL I would *never* settle this case.

 

[they'll get you]

That’s another thing that doesn’t sit well with me.

We see him lift Chloe to his right side then over to his left and that’s when his right elbow moves backwards to his waist. So he wasn’t holding her with his right arm and he wasn’t banging the window with his right arm so there’s another lie. It’s all on video!

Nothing is sitting well at the moment except he’s a walking accident waiting to happen. I can tell he’s a buffoon and he’s so stupid he doesn’t realise he’s stupid.
What a foolish foolish thing to do.

Or was this intentional?

 

[In vino veritas]

YES and if you notice also when the interviewer asked him how was he holding CW, he was very reluctant to answer that question, and then he basically goes on to admit at one point he was only holding her by ONE HAND because he was raising the other hand up to "bang on the glass". So 11 stories up, without checking, and definitely with a breeze coming through, he leans forward? I honestly think he knew the window was open and was going to play a trick on CW by "banging on glass" and then the poor girl would realize there was no glass, but she freaked out or jerked and this idiot dropped her out an open window. 100% his fault.

And also in the same interview, he says something like he watched her fall the whole way down, but almost immediately after she fell he falls to the floor, so I'm not even sure THAT statement is true. He 100% knew that window was open and then at one point he only holds her with one arm. And these parents are still blaming the cruise line and not him. If I was RCCL I would *never* settle this case.

I seriously doubt RCL will settle based on their most recent response to the plaintiff, recently posted by Kindred. And they absolutely should not capitulate to this frivolous mockery of a lawsuit.

 

[al66pine]

Mr. Jaques' Affidavit. His Prof. Experience & Qualifications?
Briefly appears to be longer on OTJ experience than formal training or education.
From affidavit of expert randall jaques.pdf
Training
"...upgraded my STCW certification in Crowd Management and continue my education with the Maritime Professional Training Center..." * Websites for several institutions describe the ^ STCW cert course in Crowd Management as a two day class. This is the only training specified re his qualifications in affidavit.
OJT /Experience:
"2....investigated over 2,000 shipboard accidents worldwide.." bbm
"3. Since 2008...performed hundreds of investigations and evaluations of marine casualties..."bbm
"...ombudsman for the United States Coast Guard, Sector Miami..." **
Employment (Was employment choppy or was it just presented it that way? I think chrono is correct):
2001-2003 .......... "Norwegian Cruise Line... full-time as a security chief aboard..." til 2003. para 3.b.
? til ? .................."deployed to Afghanistan." para 3.b.
latter part 2004 ...."a security chief " on a Disney Cruise vessel. para 3.b.
Mar '05-July '06...."a security manager, safety officer" Holland / Carnival vessels para 3.c..
no date- Dec '07..."a Chief Security Officer" Carnival Corp, various vessels. para 3.a.
Jan '07 - 2008......"deployed to Afghanistan" Then "retired from military service." para 3.d.
2008..................."owned and operated my own marine/maritime security and safety consultancy" para 3

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Maritime Professional Training (MPT) - Merchant Marine & Yacht Training and Certification
** What ^ USCG ombudsman entails:
"Ombudsman Program Overview
The Coast Guard Ombudsman Program is a command program intended to improve communication between the command and the Coast Guard family members. Coast Guard ombudsmen are communication links, provide information and referral resources and act as advocates for family members. COMDTINST 1750.4E provides details of Coast Guard Ombudsman Program."
Ombudsman Program | Office of Work-Life Programs (CG-111)

 

[katydid23]

I can’t see through the smoke and mirrors.
What is this jargon??? A securely held baby can’t fall unless it’s dropped.

However, the maritime attorney explained Anello did not drop the girl, but she fell through an open glass pane that should have been closed securely.

'She Goes To Bang On The Glass And Next Thing She's Gone': Miami Attorney On Death Of Toddler On Royal Caribbean's Freedom Of The Seas

Oh wow, what a slick twisting of words. So he didn't drop her?

If she 'fell' and he didn't drop her, doesn't that mean she wasn't being held by him at that moment?

So did he prop her up in that window ledge and let go of her, expecting her to take care of her self, at 18 months old?

 

[MsMarple]

I can’t see through the smoke and mirrors.
What is this jargon??? A securely held baby can’t fall unless it’s dropped.

However, the maritime attorney explained Anello did not drop the girl, but she fell through an open glass pane that should have been closed securely.

'She Goes To Bang On The Glass And Next Thing She's Gone': Miami Attorney On Death Of Toddler On Royal Caribbean's Freedom Of The Seas

Smoke and mirrors is right. Such semantics: SA placed Chloe on the railing and possibly onto the window ledge and she proceeded to "fall." No, he didn't "drop her" as he told the ship's doctor, now it's that she "fell."

It's almost like Chloe herself is to blame for falling through the window. SA? Nah, he had nothing to do with any of that. Chloe did it to herself. It's her fault, it's the ship's fault, just fix it, fix the boat. Gee, was SA even there when it happened? <sarcasm>

How can Chloe's parents refuse to see SA's part in Chloe's death? Is the money more important? Lalala we don't know anything other than it's RCCL's fault.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Smoke and mirrors is right. Such semantics: SA placed Chloe on the railing and possibly onto the window ledge and she proceeded to "fall." No, he didn't "drop her" as he told the ship's doctor, now it's that she "fell."

It's almost like Chloe herself is to blame for falling through the window. SA? Nah, he had nothing to do with any of that. Chloe did it to herself. It's her fault, it's the ship's fault, just fix it, fix the boat. Gee, was SA even there when it happened? <sarcasm>

How can Chloe's parents refuse to see SA's part in Chloe's death? Is the money more important? Lalala we don't know anything other than it's RCCL's fault.

BBM Italics mine Oh, there is SO much more to this story. SO much more we do not know...yet. I hope it all comes out at the trial.

 

[al66pine]

STCW "Crowd Management" Course
".. required by regulation V/3, paragraph 4 for personnel designated on muster lists to assist passengers in emergency situations.."Trainees will learn:
"The ships Muster plan
Types of Life Saving Appliances
Awareness of fire fighting appliances
How to assists passengers en route to muster and embarkation stations.
Emergency Exits.
Restrictions on the use of elevators
Mustering Procedures."
^ from Crowd Management Online Course (USCG Approved) - Seven Seas Preparatory Academy (not the school from which Jaques secured his certification).

 

[JulieBEMT]

Mr. Jaques' Affidavit. His Prof. Experience & Qualifications?
Briefly appears to be longer on OTJ experience than formal training or education.
From affidavit of expert randall jaques.pdf
Training
"...upgraded my STCW certification in Crowd Management and continue my education with the Maritime Professional Training Center..." * Websites for several institutions describe the ^ STCW cert course in Crowd Management as a two day class. This is the only training specified re his qualifications in affidavit.
OJT /Experience:
"2....investigated over 2,000 shipboard accidents worldwide.." bbm
"3. Since 2008...performed hundreds of investigations and evaluations of marine casualties..."bbm
"...ombudsman for the United States Coast Guard, Sector Miami..." **
Employment (Was employment choppy or was it just presented it that way? I think chrono is correct):
2001-2003 .......... "Norwegian Cruise Line... full-time as a security chief aboard..." til 2003. para 3.b.
? til ? .................."deployed to Afghanistan." para 3.b.
latter part 2004 ...."a security chief " on a Disney Cruise vessel. para 3.b.
Mar '05-July '06...."a security manager, safety officer" Holland / Carnival vessels para 3.c..
no date- Dec '07..."a Chief Security Officer" Carnival Corp, various vessels. para 3.a.
Jan '07 - 2008......"deployed to Afghanistan" Then "retired from military service." para 3.d.
2008..................."owned and operated my own marine/maritime security and safety consultancy" para 3...

I noticed that too. It appears that Holland America was the longest he held onto any job, and that was under two years. Not exactly the kind of career one aspires to.

 

[al66pine]

Jaques' Stmts. & Interpretation in Affidavit
Some observations, jmo re affidavit of expert randall jaques.pdf.
Page 3. Para 6. States that some photographed objects were "too far away from my view to verify as CCTV cameras."
Seems the maritime expert who "investigated over 2000 shipboard accidents worldwide" did not think to bring binoculars, a monocular, a camera w telescopic lens, or a step stool/ladder to help him read printing or labels on ceiling-height objects. But he did pack a tape measure and a device to measure force necessary to slide open window. He also identified 7 CCTV cams from which he had not seen RCL's vids.
Page 3. Para 7.
Jaques describes their RE-pix taken directly under an RCL CCTV camera #353 and other pix as being taken (not-quite-so-scientifically-measured) " two steps to the right of that camera." Did not specify the distance in inches, nor whether Pappa Bear, Mama Bear or Baby Bear steps. <sarc> He comments about the side-by-side contrast between RCL's pix & RE-pix, claiming RE-pix are "more accurate." Personally imo, agreeing the RE-pix show more, but not agreeing w his next comment, below.
"The photographs show that the video from Royal Caribbean’s CCTV camera number 353 is deceptive because it shows an angle which masks the true space between the inside edge of the handrail and the subject window which angles outaway from the handrail." bbm
No, RCL's vids are not deceptive. The show what they show. Essentially Jaques claims deception because vids/pix taken by a camera at another location show a space that RCL vids do not show.
<sarc alert> He stopped short of insinuating that RCL should have had foresight & consideration to assign an employee w vid camera to follow SA and capture his actions from angle most favorable to Wiegands whatever angle that would be. <sarc>
Page 3. Para 8.
Jaques concludes that RE-pix show it was "physically impossible" for SA to have his head outside the window with his feet on the deck. Discusses position of feet, and the string around his head w plumb bob falling inside the window. (I discussed this in a post, ~ yesterday?)
Page 4. Para 9.
Jaques concludes that RE-pix show RCLs "deceptive" vids do not show Chloe being held outside the window. 32" doll representing 31" Chloe. No comment re the doll being much, much thinner than Chloe.
Page 4. Para 10.
Jaques concludes that RE-pix show the "difficulty an average passenger discerning whether the subject window is open or closed when standing at the handrail and looking directly ahead, slightly up, slightly down, slightly to the left, and slightly to the right." bbm
Presumably, a person standing at rail got thereby walking from another place on deck, and in the course of heading in that direction, would have observed the difference in the windows, as is apparent in many other RE-pix elsewhere in the Inspection report. Jaques did not mention air movement or smell of salt air or ocean sounds thru window. As ship was apparently not at dock, no mention of noises coming from motorized equipment on dock, loading and unloading, etc.
jmo.

 

[Montrealaise]

I wonder whether anyone involved in the case (parents, lawyers, other family members) is reading our comments here. I'm curious how AW's parents (Chloe's paternal grandparents) and KW's biological father (Chloe's maternal grandfather) view SA's actions and whether they agree with their son's and daughter-in-law's position that Chloe's step-grandfather is blameless and that RCCL is responsible for her death.

 

[whatsnext]

I wonder whether anyone involved in the case (parents, lawyers, other family members) is reading our comments here. I'm curious how AW's parents (Chloe's paternal grandparents) and KW's biological father (Chloe's maternal grandfather) view SA's actions and whether they agree with their son's and daughter-in-law's position that Chloe's step-grandfather is blameless and that RCCL is responsible for her death.

I just can't imagine that they are all on the same page. There is a pretty loud silence regarding the paternal side of the family.

 

[Kindred]

NEW DOCUMENT

I was going to wait till this weekend to check for new filings but... meh. lol. At least it paid off:

PLAINTIFFS’REPLY IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE VIDEO FOOTAGE CONVENTIONALLY FILED AND REFERENCED IN DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Filed 2/3/20

Plaintiff support to strike video.pdf

Five pages. Boy does this one have me ready to bang my head on the desk.

From page 2:

"First, Plaintiffs do not object to the procedural manner in which the videos were filed (which is what Royal Caribbean’s motion to conventionally file the videos was directedat); rather, Plaintiffs object to the substance of the videos."

Translation: We didn't mind them filing the videos. We just didn't want them filing THOSE videos because they make us look bad.

Bottom of 2 into top of 3:

"1Among the parties’ agreement regarding the vessel inspection was that Royal Caribbean would provide videos of the incident before the inspection; and the manner in which Royal Caribbean provided those videos is by serving Plaintiffs’ undersigned counsel with a copy of the videos conventionally filed. In other words, Plaintiffs agreed to Royal Caribbean’s motion in order to obtain a copy of the videos they needed for the vessel inspection."

Translation: We only agreed to the filing so that we could get our hands on a copy of the video. Now that we have it we want it stricken from the record.

Like, fecking seriously? You try to claim they're being deceitful but admit you agreed just because you wanted the tapes and now that you have them no one else should be allowed to see them?

I wonder whether anyone involved in the case (parents, lawyers, other family members) is reading our comments here.

God I hope so. Maybe Winkleman will realize no one is picking up what he's putting down.

 

[JerseySleuth17]

NEW DOCUMENT

I was going to wait till this weekend to check for new filings but... meh. lol. At least it paid off:

PLAINTIFFS’REPLY IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE VIDEO FOOTAGE CONVENTIONALLY FILED AND REFERENCED IN DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Filed 2/3/20

Plaintiff support to strike video.pdf

They sure are going through a lot of trouble to strike these videos! Now why would they do that, unless what is shown on the videos is not helpful to their client? But their whole position is that RCCL is somehow at fault because SA could not tell a window was open. Yet somehow *video footage* of SA's actions does not support this argument?? Maybe it was the part where he leans his head out the window for 8 seconds. This entire lawsuit is ridiculous.

 

[Chikkamma]

When I first heard a child had fallen overboard I envisioned an 8-10 year old from over a room balcony.

Then when I heard it was a baby and saw those windows I immediately thought wth ‘HOW?’ as we’ve sailed on RCC 5 times and know those windows reasonably well, that’s when my hinky meter climbed.

Before I started with Websleuths back in 2012 I was naive, really naive because I never realised that so much conniving evil walked this earth and I’m continually taken aback so now I’m naturally suspicious.

Winkleman was hired extremely early and I wonder if mum knew (of) him through her line of work. I read an early article where winkleman said he was hired to stop the rumours flying around on the internet. Only the rumours?

When the jury does decide it will be big news not only here in Australia.

Mom hired Winkleman very quickly indeed. Can’t help but wonder if this was this the first time the Wiegands tried to sue a cruise line?

They seem to have had Winkleman, cruise line ambulance chaser, on speed dial.