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

[Midwestmom2019]

My point was more that nobody is in CW's corner. Instead, they all stand in public solidarity with the man who killed her. It's as if her death doesn't matter because SA is more important to them.

No, not true. Unless I missed it, AW’s parents were onboard at the time Chloe died. They have never backed SA with any comments. They are silent.
Tells me, they are against SA but cannot say anything bc their son is married into the tragedy.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Many times a death of a child destroys a marriage. It would not surprise me if that were to happen here, too. Especially since AW crying his eyes out and his parents are silent. I know what they think. Don’t you?

I don't know for sure, but I have a pretty good idea. JMOO

 

[Midwestmom2019]

If you look at his bio on his law firm's website, you see the list of high dollar cases he's won.

He drives a very nice car, I'm sure.

I’m sure there is another list of all the lawsuits he hasn’t won. It’s just not published. I don’t know of any lawyer who has a perfect record of winning verdicts. Some cases don’t settle and have to be tried.

 

[SoCalDavidS]

Many times a death of a child destroys a marriage. It would not surprise me if that were to happen here, too. Especially since AW crying his eyes out and his parents are silent. I know what they think. Don’t you?

Yeah, I would love to hear what the other grandparents think about what happened. But I'm sure they've been told to keep their mouths shut.

 

[mheido67]

So their reasoning is that it's perfectly acceptable to raise a child up over a safety railing, so long as there is assumed to be a window. So decks with a railing and no windows, in that case, Grandpa would be at fault. Ahhh....the contortions one must go through to justify their opinions.

I highly doubt that MW would offer that it’s acceptable to lift a child over any safety railing. He doesn’t need to concede that. His argument is that the appearance of a solid wall of glass places people in a different frame of mind when near it as opposed to when they are just next to a railing. They are put at ease because they assume the glass makes them safe. It creates a barrier. So the fact that the design of the glass wall included operable panes that he maintains we’re not clearly identifiable as such creates a hidden danger that RCCL should have been aware of and should have taken steps to address ie placing warning stickers on the sills of the operable portions. The problem with this is SA stood in front of the open window for almost a minute. He didn’t just walk up to it and quickly put CW on the rail and she was gone. It didn’t happen in an instant like they said early on before the video got leaked. MW has to contend with the fact that any reasonable person standing in front of an open window for more than a few seconds would realize there was no glass, no barrier.

 

[neesaki]

There would not be because their agrument hinges on the supposed hidden danger that openings in what appeared to be a 'solid wall of glass' presented. Climbing on or leaning over a balcony railing presents a clear and obvious danger that is readily apparent to any reasonable person. This case is going to come down to whether a jury believes SA could have been in front of that open window as long as he was and NOT observed that the window was in fact open. EDIT: Or rather that a reasonable person could have done so.

Well we’ve all seen the photos, which reveal it was very obvious there were open windows. So, the claim of any “hidden danger” is a fraudulent claim, IMO. So, there is that.

And then we have SA who stuck his mug out the open window, or at minimum up to the windows opening... (clear from video ) for some reason. Why? For fresh air because he was sweltering from the heat, and/or drunk and/or under the influence of drugs?
Or, for surveillance of the dock before a premeditated murder?

Your guess is as good as mine, and I know there are several of us with theories much darker than a numbskull, fool of a man “accidentally” dropping a baby out an obviously open window. Jmo

 

[JerseySleuth17]

Well we’ve all seen the photos, which reveal it was very obvious there were open windows. So, the claim of any “hidden danger” is a fraudulent claim, IMO. So, there is that.

And then we have SA who stuck his mug out the open window, or at minimum up to the windows opening... (clear from video ) for some reason. Why? For fresh air because he was sweltering from the heat, and/or drunk and/or under the influence of drugs?
Or, for surveillance of the dock before a premeditated murder?

Your guess is as good as mine, and I know there are several of us with theories much darker than a numbskull, fool of a man “accidentally” dropping a baby out an obviously open window. Jmo

It is impossible to think the window was closed standing in front of it for 30+ seconds, so that entire story line is ridiculous. Any jury person standing in front of that window would know it was open. A *blind* person would know it was open because of the breeze/sound/movement. So if you start with the premise he knew the window was open - then what? He didn't think he would drop her? He was impaired with alcohol and/or drugs? He was sober and thought he would play a game? He's a sociopath who intentionally dropped her? I don't have the answer, I just know he knew that window was open and the discussion should be starting from there, and not getting bogged down into whether he was colorblind, whether he thought the window was closed, etc. And when I start from there, I seriously question whether some part of him did this on purpose. Who holds a baby with one hand 11 stories up in front of an open window?? Someone not too concerned she might fall out of it??

 

[Hughaskton]

So

It is impossible to think the window was closed standing in front of it for 30+ seconds, so that entire story line is ridiculous. Any jury person standing in front of that window would know it was open. A *blind* person would know it was open because of the breeze/sound/movement. So if you start with the premise he knew the window was open - then what? He didn't think he would drop her? He was impaired with alcohol and/or drugs? He was sober and thought he would play a game? He's a sociopath who intentionally dropped her? I don't have the answer, I just know he knew that window was open and the discussion should be starting from there, and not getting bogged down into whether he was colorblind, whether he thought the window was closed, etc. And when I start from there, I seriously question whether some part of him did this on purpose. Who holds a baby with one hand 11 stories up in front of an open window?? Someone not too concerned she might fall out of it??

So much this...

I don’t really think he did this purposefully, but I do understand why people think this. It is truly unfathomable this happened. It’s really hard for the brain to process this level of negligence. Having children of my own, the thought of ever putting them in danger is not something I can comprehend. While accidents happen and when they do, parents or care takers often blame themselves, for true accidents. To see that SA is deflecting his own culpability here makes me, as a parent go, wtf dude, you literally did this, you put this in motion and you knew that window was open. I kind of think he is just to high on himself. Look at me, I’ll put her up to this window and let her look out, disregarding common safety. He either chose to ignore that maternal instinct, that instinct to protect those who can’t protect themselves or understand danger. He thought, it’s fine, but it wasn’t, because 18 months old and it’s entirely possible as she got to the window and she herself realized the danger, at a mere 18 months, she knew this was dangerous and she panicked and got squirmy. He was not prepared and she fell out that window. What a tragedy this is, but not a tragedy that was avoidable because RC didn’t have stickers or the window was not far enough from the railing, a tragedy because a grandfather failed his granddaughter.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

So

So much this...

I don’t really think he did this purposefully, but I do understand why people think this. It is truly unfathomable this happened. It’s really hard for the brain to process this level of negligence. Having children of my own, the thought of ever putting them in danger is not something I can comprehend. While accidents happen and when they do, parents or care takers often blame themselves, for true accidents. To see that SA is deflecting his own culpability here makes me, as a parent go, wtf dude, you literally did this, you put this in motion and you knew that window was open. I kind of think he is just to high on himself. Look at me, I’ll put her up to this window and let her look out, disregarding common safety. He either chose to ignore that maternal instinct, that instinct to protect those who can’t protect themselves or understand danger. He thought, it’s fine, but it wasn’t, because 18 months old and it’s entirely possible as she got to the window and she herself realized the danger, at a mere 18 months, she knew this was dangerous and she panicked and got squirmy. He was not prepared and she fell out that window. What a tragedy this is, but not a tragedy that was avoidable because RC didn’t have stickers or the window was not far enough from the railing, a tragedy because a grandfather failed his granddaughter.

Looked pretty deliberate to me in the video. JMOO.

 

[Hughaskton]

Looked pretty deliberate to me in the video. JMOO.

For the record. I do think he deliberately put her up to an open window, 100% believe he knew that window was wide open. I’m just not sure he deliberately dropped her. That said, I understand your feeling.

 

[Safetybug]

It is impossible to think the window was closed standing in front of it for 30+ seconds, so that entire story line is ridiculous. Any jury person standing in front of that window would know it was open. A *blind* person would know it was open because of the breeze/sound/movement. So if you start with the premise he knew the window was open - then what? He didn't think he would drop her? He was impaired with alcohol and/or drugs? He was sober and thought he would play a game? He's a sociopath who intentionally dropped her? I don't have the answer, I just know he knew that window was open and the discussion should be starting from there, and not getting bogged down into whether he was colorblind, whether he thought the window was closed, etc. And when I start from there, I seriously question whether some part of him did this on purpose. Who holds a baby with one hand 11 stories up in front of an open window?? Someone not too concerned she might fall out of it??

I have been to PR docking area only once (different cruise line) It was mid-Dec, the temp back home was 33 degrees and within a short span of hrs had become over 80! But the biggest adjustment was the HUMIDITY factor of 80%!! So if I was on a set up like RCCL, in JULY I would definitely crave/bee-line over to that delicious cool breeze from the open windows! So to SA I say liar liar pants on fire!

I agree with posters who have said even a *blind* person would be keenly aware of an open window even at a great distance. Plus the extra pull of a cross-breeze since windows were open on the opposite side too

Both SA & CE were undoubtedly slippery from sweat so to hold on to a squirmy 20+ pound toddler while leaning forward for nearly a minute on any planet is reckless endangerment.

It’s all a perfect storm of SA’s stupidity. All the spin in the world won’t change the video evidence. Whether a jury or the family EVER see past the lawyer’s “wall of lies” or not... doesn’t change what really happened. IMO.

~ May CW Rest In Peace.

 

[JulieBEMT]

It is impossible to think the window was closed standing in front of it for 30+ seconds, so that entire story line is ridiculous. Any jury person standing in front of that window would know it was open. A *blind* person would know it was open because of the breeze/sound/movement. So if you start with the premise he knew the window was open - then what? He didn't think he would drop her? He was impaired with alcohol and/or drugs? He was sober and thought he would play a game? He's a sociopath who intentionally dropped her? I don't have the answer, I just know he knew that window was open and the discussion should be starting from there, and not getting bogged down into whether he was colorblind, whether he thought the window was closed, etc. And when I start from there, I seriously question whether some part of him did this on purpose. Who holds a baby with one hand 11 stories up in front of an open window?? Someone not too concerned she might fall out of it??

I could not agree more! Having been on Freedom and Voyager class ships 11 times (with another one in two weeks), I never believed for a single second that he didn't know the window was open. It would be impossible not to know - and that was before the video came to light! I know we've said this before, but I truly hope they will take the jury onto one of these ships. If they do, the civil case is done. I will most certainly be taking some photos on the ship while I'm there!

 

[Midwestmom2019]

I could not agree more! Having been on Freedom and Voyager class ships 11 times (with another one in two weeks), I never believed for a single second that he didn't know the window was open. It would be impossible not to know - and that was before the video came to light! I know we've said this before, but I truly hope they will take the jury onto one of these ships. If they do, the civil case is done. I will most certainly be taking some photos on the ship while I'm there!

I’m more interested in the criminal case outcome. I would think if SA is found guilty, THAT would be the basis for a motion to dismiss. It’s a higher burden of proof. So guilty in criminal court should make the civil action disappear. It’s the same set of facts. Once guilty in criminal court, dominoes down. It is not true for the other way around. OJSimpson comes to mind.

 

[neesaki]

It is impossible to think the window was closed standing in front of it for 30+ seconds, so that entire story line is ridiculous. Any jury person standing in front of that window would know it was open. A *blind* person would know it was open because of the breeze/sound/movement. So if you start with the premise he knew the window was open - then what? He didn't think he would drop her? He was impaired with alcohol and/or drugs? He was sober and thought he would play a game? He's a sociopath who intentionally dropped her? I don't have the answer, I just know he knew that window was open and the discussion should be starting from there, and not getting bogged down into whether he was colorblind, whether he thought the window was closed, etc. And when I start from there, I seriously question whether some part of him did this on purpose. Who holds a baby with one hand 11 stories up in front of an open window?? Someone not too concerned she might fall out of it??

Well, starting out,

 

[mheido67]

I’m more interested in the criminal case outcome. I would think if SA is found guilty, THAT would be the basis for a motion to dismiss. It’s a higher burden of proof. So guilty in criminal court should make the civil action disappear. It’s the same set of facts. Once guilty in criminal court, dominoes down. It is not true for the other way around. OJSimpson comes to mind.

I’m not sure that’s necessarily the case. Just because SA is found guilty of negligence wouldn’t preclude a finding of negligence on the part of RCCL. It would certainly make it much more difficult for MW but there can certainly be more than one party guilty of negligence in any particular situation.

 

[they'll get you]

I wonder what the police chief is saying now that the video has been released.

And SA’s boss who spoke glowingly of SA.
To be a fly on the wall when the boss saw the video.
WTH moment.

 

[WiseGuy]

For the record. I do think he deliberately put her up to an open window, 100% believe he knew that window was wide open. I’m just not sure he deliberately dropped her. That said, I understand your feeling.

Watch SA's immediate reaction after Chloe has fallen from his hands. He drops to the floor. That is not what every other human being would do if a baby unexpectedly falls out of your hands. You'd instinctively reach and try to grab the baby, or any object that UNEXPECTEDLY falls from your hands. Then you'd practically dive out the window, trying in vain to grab the baby/object. You'd watch the fall trying to comprehend what you are seeing. It would take a moment to process this event, because it's impossible, yet it is happening. You'd scream NOOOOOO.... Because without exception, the first emotion is denial. Unless you've already planned the event out and are not surprised by the fall because you had time to process it as you planned it.

It takes three seconds to fall 150 feet. In the video what is Anello doing in the three seconds after Chloe disappears from the screen? He's keeping his fat butt safely inside the railing.

For me this is the most persuasive argument supporting the "premeditated" theory.

 

[In vino veritas]

Watch SA's immediate reaction after Chloe has fallen from his hands. He drops to the floor. That is not what every other human being would do if a baby unexpectedly falls out of your hands. You'd instinctively reach and try to grab the baby, or any object that UNEXPECTEDLY falls from your hands. Then you'd practically dive out the window, trying in vain to grab the baby/object. You'd watch the fall trying to comprehend what you are seeing. It would take a moment to process this event, because it's impossible, yet it is happening. You'd scream NOOOOOO.... Because without exception, the first emotion is denial. Unless you've already planned the event out and are not surprised by the fall because you had time to process it as you planned it.

It takes three seconds to fall 150 feet. In the video what is Anello doing in the three seconds after Chloe disappears from the screen? He's keeping his fat butt safely inside the railing.

For me this is the most persuasive argument supporting the "premeditated" theory.

I also always thought a person’s first inclination , after something valuable, in this case a precious baby, falls out of a window would be to reach out and try to retrieve. Also, I always was surprised he didn’t scream NOOOO.... or CHLOEEE... or something other type of exclamation. And I don’t think he did.... at least at the time he dropped her..... because people didn’t start running over until he’s on the ground.

Seems extremely odd, but then again, all people are different and react differently.

 

[Medstudies]

Slightly off topic, I hear Japan plans to allow elderly passengers to disembark from the quarantined cruise ship (contingent upon negative for COVID) ...and my first thought was, -what age do they consider “elderly”?

Spoiler: You have to be this old to be elderly - per Japan

80

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Watch SA's immediate reaction after Chloe has fallen from his hands. He drops to the floor. That is not what every other human being would do if a baby unexpectedly falls out of your hands. You'd instinctively reach and try to grab the baby, or any object that UNEXPECTEDLY falls from your hands. Then you'd practically dive out the window, trying in vain to grab the baby/object. You'd watch the fall trying to comprehend what you are seeing. It would take a moment to process this event, because it's impossible, yet it is happening. You'd scream NOOOOOO.... Because without exception, the first emotion is denial. Unless you've already planned the event out and are not surprised by the fall because you had time to process it as you planned it.

It takes three seconds to fall 150 feet. In the video what is Anello doing in the three seconds after Chloe disappears from the screen? He's keeping his fat butt safely inside the railing.

For me this is the most persuasive argument supporting the "premeditated" theory.

I wonder if anyone who saw SA on the floor hadn't seen Chloe and thought the "elderly gentleman" had suffered a heart attack/stroke or passed out from the heat/humidity? What is most peculiar is that SA was not calling out for help or pleading for someone to rescue his grandchild on the concrete dock below. I guess he figured it wasn't necessary to cry out for help because he knew that Chloe wouldn't survive the 150 foot fall.