Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
ATC cruiser

Toddler Death Law Suit Update

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, boscobeans said:

The family layer is still being shown on media stating that Royal Caribbean is at fault claiming they should never have an open window in a children's play area.  Even after showing a still shot of the grandfather leaning out the window right next to the BAR.  Do you think ONE news reporter would point that out??  NOPE. NOT ONE.

Why ask inconvenient questions when that will ruin the narrative you want to craft?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if grandpa has ever come back to his car in a snow storm and found his car full of snow because he didn't know his window was open?

 

Probably has a wicked air conditioning bill in the summer when the windows in the house are open.  

 

Drive through restaurants must be a PITA for him.  Is the window open or closed?  So confusing.

 

I'm assuming he is an Apple IT professional because Windows seems to give him a lot of trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, mitsugirly said:

 

 

 

 

I hadn't read that either. Who reported this information? Just wondering.

 

 

Anyone see his interview? He still seems confused and changing stories.

 

Just my thoughts on the interview and looking at the video (copied and pasted from the other thread about this)

 

He said she was down at the bottom glass (to bang on the window like she does at the hockey games) so he bent down to do it and HE couldn't reach except for his fingertips....so he knew SHE couldn't reach either (which makes no sense because she would have been right at the bottom window underneath the handrail because there's no danger there and definitely been able to reach the glass). So that's when he decided he'd pick her up (video shows him being down there for about 4 seconds, which to me was long enough for him to bring her back away from the glass she was at and then under the handrail and lift her up).

 

Next when he was asked to show how he was holding her (interviewer asked if it was in a "bear hug" and moved his arms to represent that), then Anello agreed and did the same and states "from what I remember". 

 

He then said he was trying to knock on the glass himself (of course that meant you wouldn't have her in a bear hug with 2 arms holding on to her otherwise, how would you knock?) and said at that point he "was going to have to lean forward for her to reach it" then admits he only had 1 arm around her at that point. (He is seen in the video switching arms and holding her with 1 arm at a time)

 

He did say initially he blamed himself  but now "the more and more days go by" that he blames the cruise line.

 

Just watching the interview, I think he is cautious of what he is saying (of course probably advised by his counsel) and seems somewhat confused, maybe even easily influenced (by the interviewer asking a question and then suggesting the answer). I don't know. It's such a sad situation for everyone. I just think this story has changed so many times and the grandfather is so distraught and confused, maybe even blocking the tragic memory in his mind, that he just can't keep the story straight now. 😞

Mitsigirly - I read that somewhere in one of the many articles on this. I thought someone here on cc posted it but I can't find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to say, when I first read about this I heard the toddler was held "for a few seconds up to the window."  I watched the video with some trepidation (and only after others saying you could not actually see the child drop.)  To watch it and count the 34 or whatever seconds she was held out the window.....34 seconds is an incredibly long time.  Try sitting still and counting 34 seconds.  It could perhaps been considered a tragic accident if she slipped after "a few seconds."  (This in no way takes away from the GF's culpability.)  But to watch that video and see how long she was dangled out of a window that high up over the dock is an entirely different action.  This didn't happen in an instant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I saw the video, we were lead to believe that GF held child UP to the window. Obviously, that wasn't the case, as it's clear as day that GF held child OUT the window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, twangster said:

I wonder if grandpa has ever come back to his car in a snow storm and found his car full of snow because he didn't know his window was open?

 

Probably has a wicked air conditioning bill in the summer when the windows in the house are open.  

 

Drive through restaurants must be a PITA for him.  Is the window open or closed?  So confusing.

 

I'm assuming he is an Apple IT professional because Windows seems to give him a lot of trouble.


This might be funny under  other circumstances.

Given the back-story though it's just dumb.

And so are all the likes you got for it.

Edited by MotownVoice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MotownVoice said:


This might be funny under  other circumstances.

Given the back-story though it's just dumb.

And so are all the likes you got for it.

 

What's dumb is that is that is even a legal case.  This entire thread wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the insanity of the American legal system.

 

He brought this on himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just learned of this...what a nightmare!

 

The video shows the GF leaning out of the window first and then he leans down and picks up his GD, lifts her up OVER the rail. Who does this?! Never would I ever lift a child up out of a window at 11 stories high but why didn't he at least rest her on the rail and hold her?! He lifts her OVER the rail. Had he been drinking? Did he let go? If that were my niece or nephew, I would have had a death grip on them, but then again, I wouldn't have done this in the first place.  

 

IMO, in the GF's state of panic/shock, he probably told the details to his family incorrectly such as there was glass and it slid open, etc. because he was either drunk, his subconsciousness quickly realized he shouldn't have lifted her in the first place, and/or he lied to himself in the aftermath and therefore relayed incorrect details of what happened.  Suffering in his own guilt, he's begins pointing fingers at RC about the glass.  The family already overcome with grief and shock are angry, but being angry at the GF is too emotionally complicated so they go after RC.  And, since they believe the GF's story (who wouldn't), they have been incredibly misinformed of who is really at fault.  Now they are in a mess, because misdirected grief and anger have led them here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2020 at 6:48 AM, BeachChik said:


I’m not disagreeing that he probably knew the window was open. But if this was your family member I’m sure you would want to believe that he didn’t know as well. No one would want to think he knew the window was open and hung her out it anyway. I would imagine it makes them feel better thinking he didn’t know it was open. 

 

Yes, sometimes family members will choose to live in denial rather than face the truth about a loved one.

 

A bit long but an example of denial:

We had an incident on a ship where a man (pervert) exposed his genitals to my 12 and 14 year old daughters while walking on a passenger cabin hallway. I was there as well but a few feet behind and he didn't see me until I came around the corner while his pants were already dropping. We got a full frontal view. I checked for cameras where it happened and reported it.

 

My statement to Security matched the video footage. Security found hm with the camera footage and questioned him. Even though he claimed his pants fell down (with no underwear on) by accident, the video showed otherwise, and he was confined to his cabin. They asked me if I would like to see the video and I chose to watch it just to confirm it was deliberate and not a mistake as he had claimed (my wanting to believe the good in people was making me question what had happened) He was undoing his pants when he saw my girls coming so it was no accident.

 

Once we got to Fort Lauderdale the Broward police reviewed the tapes and questioned him and his wife. His wife was asked if she'd like to see the video and she declined. She believed him. They've been married a long time with an adult daughter and grandkids. Sadly, some people choose to be an ostrich to protect their image of people they love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, helen haywood said:

Just wanted to say, when I first read about this I heard the toddler was held "for a few seconds up to the window."  I watched the video with some trepidation (and only after others saying you could not actually see the child drop.)  To watch it and count the 34 or whatever seconds she was held out the window.....34 seconds is an incredibly long time.  Try sitting still and counting 34 seconds.  It could perhaps been considered a tragic accident if she slipped after "a few seconds."  (This in no way takes away from the GF's culpability.)  But to watch that video and see how long she was dangled out of a window that high up over the dock is an entirely different action.  This didn't happen in an instant.

At best the GF was an idiot,at worst????

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/09/us/cruise-ship-toddler-attorney-press-conference/index.html

 

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/briannasacks/chloe-wiegand-death-cruise-family-charges-puerto-rico

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7237859/Devastated-grandfather-toddler-died-falling-arms-cruise-ship-arrives-Chicago.html

 

Winkleman says alcohol not involved -  that GF is "not a drinker". He has every reason to say that. I can't find any reports where anyone other than Winkleman speaks of alcohol.

Edited by JennyB1977

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Hogbay said:

What excuse .? a federal bang on the glass clause ? What Federal industry safety standards.? What glass - less windows ? It's a ship so Maritime Law , there was a hand rail of correct height as to not be able to fall over with a window with tinted glass open for ventlation in a bar area serving alachol. The 0ne year old could not ask to be picked up and dangled over the handrail out a open window. and dropped. Children are to be supervised at all times by a responsible adult, this did not happen.  

I'm 100% with you.  I just don't get what is making them fight this, and why I asked "Does this crazy toddler safety standard exist that the family attorney is trying to claim??". Especially if they knew there was the "REAL" video floating around that would further prove how reckless the Grandfather was.  So basically their logic is "Everything should be idiot proof, so these accidents don't happen"    WOW....might has well throw a cage around the entire ship and make us feel like we are in jail b/c heaven forbid an idiot find a way to hurt themselves or others.  *face in palm*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Sunset Glow said:

 

Yes, sometimes family members will choose to live in denial rather than face the truth about a loved one.

 

A bit long but an example of denial:

We had an incident on a ship where a man (pervert) exposed his genitals to my 12 and 14 year old daughters while walking on a passenger cabin hallway. I was there as well but a few feet behind and he didn't see me until I came around the corner while his pants were already dropping. We got a full frontal view. I checked for cameras where it happened and reported it.

 

My statement to Security matched the video footage. Security found hm with the camera footage and questioned him. Even though he claimed his pants fell down (with no underwear on) by accident, the video showed otherwise, and he was confined to his cabin. They asked me if I would like to see the video and I chose to watch it just to confirm it was deliberate and not a mistake as he had claimed (my wanting to believe the good in people was making me question what had happened) He was undoing his pants when he saw my girls coming so it was no accident.

 

Once we got to Fort Lauderdale the Broward police reviewed the tapes and questioned him and his wife. His wife was asked if she'd like to see the video and she declined. She believed him. They've been married a long time with an adult daughter and grandkids. Sadly, some people choose to be an ostrich to protect their image of people they love.

I hope your daughter's are okay.

He wants locking up,it probably wasn't his first time either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Sunset Glow said:

 

Yes, sometimes family members will choose to live in denial rather than face the truth about a loved one.

 

A bit long but an example of denial:

We had an incident on a ship where a man (pervert) exposed his genitals to my 12 and 14 year old daughters while walking on a passenger cabin hallway. I was there as well but a few feet behind and he didn't see me until I came around the corner while his pants were already dropping. We got a full frontal view. I checked for cameras where it happened and reported it.

 

My statement to Security matched the video footage. Security found hm with the camera footage and questioned him. Even though he claimed his pants fell down (with no underwear on) by accident, the video showed otherwise, and he was confined to his cabin. They asked me if I would like to see the video and I chose to watch it just to confirm it was deliberate and not a mistake as he had claimed (my wanting to believe the good in people was making me question what had happened) He was undoing his pants when he saw my girls coming so it was no accident.

 

Once we got to Fort Lauderdale the Broward police reviewed the tapes and questioned him and his wife. His wife was asked if she'd like to see the video and she declined. She believed him. They've been married a long time with an adult daughter and grandkids. Sadly, some people choose to be an ostrich to protect their image of people they love.

Omg! I hope he was convicted and thrown in jail. If he did that to your daughters then it probably wasn't the first time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Two Wheels Only said:

 

The child hit the concrete where the ship was docked. According to at least one report, she did impact the ship on the way down but I cannot confirm nor have I seen video to support that.

 

Embarkation was delayed but the ship did sail without the family.

 

How horrible. Makes my heart hurt to think how she suffered in those few seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, twangster said:

 

What's dumb is that is that is even a legal case.  This entire thread wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the insanity of the American legal system.

 

He brought this on himself.

Well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BeachChik said:

 

How horrible. Makes my heart hurt to think how she suffered in those few seconds.

I'm hoping she was knocked out and didn't suffer anymore and was to young to realize she was falling to her death. At least it was quick unlike other parents who have killed their own children intentionally and not so fast. There are some sick and twisted people out there.  😡

Edited by ReneeFLL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Hogbay said:

What excuse .? a federal bang on the glass clause ? What Federal industry safety standards.? What glass - less windows ? It's a ship so Maritime Law , there was a hand rail of correct height as to not be able to fall over with a window with tinted glass open for ventlation in a bar area serving alachol. The 0ne year old could not ask to be picked up and dangled over the handrail out a open window. and dropped. Children are to be supervised at all times by a responsible adult, this did not happen.  


Please read my post from earlier on below. They are trying on apply US  Mainland law to the Maritime world. They are throwing mud hoping some thing will stick. 

 

 

On 1/18/2020 at 9:44 PM, A&L_Ont said:

I was doing a little looking on-line and found the “WRONGFUL DEATH COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL”, that was filed by the families lawyers. Interesting read, considering frequent cruisers are very familiar with RC ships and can question their claims. 
 

 

https://www.lipcon.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/DE-1-Wrongful-Death-Complaint.pdf

 

Many things in it show how the lawyers are grasping but #22 makes me shake my head.

 

22. While some who are uninformed may initially characterize this type of incident as a “freak accident,” it is, in fact, quite common. In fact, this type of risk was, at one time, a common enough hazard that there were numerous industry standards put in place to prevent this very type of incident. Yet, at all times material hereto, the middle row of the glass wall aboard the vessel violated national and international codes, standards, guidelines, and recommendations applicable to windows, including, but not limited to, industry standards set forth by the ASTM International1 (“ASTM”), other cruise lines, and other cruise ships owned and operated by Defendant itself.


 

ASTM set standards for buildings on American soil. What other cruise lines do, is not an industry dry land standard.  They also state that RC newest ships do not have windows that open beside the kids water park.  We all know the Harmony and Symphony have the same windows that open beside the “water park”, and they are newer than Anthem. 

 

I guess you can read it for yourself and form your own opinions.  I wish @chengkp75 would chime in on Maritime Standards to which they speak of. Perhaps he can help clarify on the construction aspect and standards. 
 

The following in italics are excerpts from pages 8-14 of their Wrongful Death Complaint. 
 

 

31. At all times material hereto, Defendant knew or should have known of the industry standard set forth by other cruise lines, including, but not limited to, Carnival and NCL, yet Defendant’s vessel was not in compliance with such standards.

 

 Industry Standard – Defendant’s Other Vessels

32. Notably, Defendant’s newer vessels do comply with the foregoing industry standards by having glass panes that do not open in the same or similar water park area for children. For instance, as depicted below, the glass panes near the water park aboard the Anthem of the Seas do not open at all:

 

33. The fact that Defendant’s newer vessels comply with industry standards on windows, including the Anthem of the Seas, serves as evidence that Defendant knew or should have known of the foregoing industry standards set forth by the ASTM and/or other cruise lines.

 

 

EDIT TO ADD:  when Jim Walker says the following you know it’s a tough case. 
 

But Miami-based maritime lawyer Jim Walker says proving negligence won’t be an easy feat for the family.
“In order for a cruise line to be legally liable for this child’s death, the family’s lawyer must prove that the cruise line acted unreasonably and that the cruise line knew or should have known of the specific danger on its ship,” he told news.com.au.
“This will be an exceedingly difficult burden for the lawyer to meet in this very sad and tragic set of circumstances.
“Without evidence (prior incidents or proof that the cruise line knew of a dangerous condition on the cruise ship) the chances are slim that the court (if suit is filed) would permit this case to proceed to a jury trial,” he added.

 

 

I think if RC started to bolt all these styles of windows shut, or add safety signs they would have shown that they thought they were dangerous.  None of these sliding windows have been changed since this unfortunate incident. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2020 at 4:41 AM, A&L_Ont said:

 

Because the lawyers are hoping it will be settled before anyone ever sets foot in a court room. Insurance almost always wants to pay out before going to court, simply to save their lawyers fees on top of having to make a payout.
 

In this situation it seems as though RC’s case is fairly iron clad, as they are sticking to their perverbial guns. Since they know the entirety of the video, to them it is the fault of the GF that lead to passing of the GD.  The family’s lawyer tried them by the “court of public appeal”, but in this case I think RC will go the distance unless the lawyer stops the case. 
 

As it stands now the court of public appeal has turned against the family, even though the general public is sympathetic to the loss of their daughter. 

I think it will go to full case as well.

 

I honestly do not think Royal Caribbean could ethically settle this at all. They have to take it to the full extent. To settle would be dangerous. The entire cruising world is watching this and if Royal Caribbean were to settle it would set an extremely dangerous precedent that signals they actually pay money for your stupid mistakes.

 

If they were to settle then what next, some sicko pushing an elderly relative off the ship to get a payout, or tossing away your terminally ill relatives from a ship to get a settlement. People even commit suicide by jumping each year. It would be also bad to have the family seek compensation because if any little thing they can think of when someone goes over the side.

 

This is how dangerous it is for them to settle. They have to stick to their guns and refuse to settle. To settle would open the floodgates of people wanting to profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Brisbane41 said:

I think it will go to full case as well.

 

I honestly do not think Royal Caribbean could ethically settle this at all. They have to take it to the full extent. To settle would be dangerous. The entire cruising world is watching this and if Royal Caribbean were to settle it would set an extremely dangerous precedent that signals they actually pay money for your stupid mistakes.

 

If they were to settle then what next, some sicko pushing an elderly relative off the ship to get a payout, or tossing away your terminally ill relatives from a ship to get a settlement. People even commit suicide by jumping each year. It would be also bad to have the family seek compensation because if any little thing they can think of when someone goes over the side.

 

This is how dangerous it is for them to settle. They have to stick to their guns and refuse to settle. To settle would open the floodgates of people wanting to profit.

I totally agree.

Money should be spent on crew pay and passenger facilities instead of to a family who sadly lost their daughter through the ridiculous and irresponsible actions of their own stupid family member

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MotownVoice said:


This might be funny under  other circumstances.

Given the back-story though it's just dumb.

And so are all the likes you got for it.

Calm down Francis 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brisbane41 said:

I think it will go to full case as well.

 

I honestly do not think Royal Caribbean could ethically settle this at all. They have to take it to the full extent. To settle would be dangerous. The entire cruising world is watching this and if Royal Caribbean were to settle it would set an extremely dangerous precedent that signals they actually pay money for your stupid mistakes.

 

If they were to settle then what next, some sicko pushing an elderly relative off the ship to get a payout, or tossing away your terminally ill relatives from a ship to get a settlement. People even commit suicide by jumping each year. It would be also bad to have the family seek compensation because if any little thing they can think of when someone goes over the side.

 

This is how dangerous it is for them to settle. They have to stick to their guns and refuse to settle. To settle would open the floodgates of people wanting to profit.

They shouldn’t settle because there is no case, not because folks would be tossing their loved ones overboard for cash! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes me think of the difference between 2 other tragedies--one where a child had a near death drowning on DCL and one where a child was lost to an alligator at Disney. Within a day of those, both families said they were not seeking legal recourse and neither hired a lawyer. I'm guessing Disney handled things privately with them--esp the family of the boy who will need care the rest of his life--but none of this legal action. Maybe the fact that a family member was involved made them think they needed to get out ahead of things? No idea, but I can't believe it's good for the well being of the family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brisbane41 said:

I think it will go to full case as well.

 

I honestly do not think Royal Caribbean could ethically settle this at all. They have to take it to the full extent. To settle would be dangerous. The entire cruising world is watching this and if Royal Caribbean were to settle it would set an extremely dangerous precedent that signals they actually pay money for your stupid mistakes.

 

If they were to settle then what next, some sicko pushing an elderly relative off the ship to get a payout, or tossing away your terminally ill relatives from a ship to get a settlement. People even commit suicide by jumping each year. It would be also bad to have the family seek compensation because if any little thing they can think of when someone goes over the side.

 

This is how dangerous it is for them to settle. They have to stick to their guns and refuse to settle. To settle would open the floodgates of people wanting to profit.

I remember the George Smith case. They paid that family ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't the granddad a police officer? aren't police officers trained to be extra vigilant? From day 1I said there was something fishy in this case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...