Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
ATC cruiser

Toddler Death Law Suit Update

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Is it an accident?  Yes.  Is it negligent? I don't think a "reasonable person" would think of holding a child out an 11th story window, so Yes.  So, the grandfather's negligent actions led to the accident, and under the law he can be held accountable for his actions.  Just as the parents want RCI held responsible for "negligence" in the design of the ship, the law says that the grandfather can be held responsible for his negligence.

I responding to the poster who said it wasn't an accident and we shouldn't call it as such.

 

I think he is negligent and if he was smart, he'd accept a plea.  Since he apparently isn't, I'm not going to feel sorry if he gets a harsh sentence. 

 

Edited by S.A.M.J.R.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, A&L_Ont said:


I could not find it on-line but for some reason my wife thought the GF was an officer as well. It does run in the family, but I couldn’t find it. 

 


I think the only way will not is if the family retracts their case.  I don’t think they will. 

 

The GF is an IT worker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ptf2009 said:

Whenever I see or read anything about this case, all I can think of is:  the grandfather has been punished enough...or how can you punish him more?

 

He was offered a plea deal that would have given him no jail time & probation. Not taking that deal is the 2nd stupidest thing that he has ever done.

 

2 hours ago, ptf2009 said:

He has lost is precious granddaughter and has to live with this every second of every day!

 

Do you feel the same about every criminal who kills someone? If someone intentionally did something reckless and accidentally killed a member of your family, would you feel that the person should not be charged?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, A&L_Ont said:

I could not find it on-line but for some reason my wife thought the GF was an officer as well. It does run in the family, but I couldn’t find it. 

 

Anello is actually the step-grandfather. He's only 51 and married Chloe's mother's mother. Anello works in IT so nothing runs in the family as far as being a police officer for Anello.

Share this post


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

 

The GF is an IT worker.


Thanks for the info. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

I don't deal with US construction or OSHA codes, so I'm not sure of the exact requirements either, but the ships do not have to meet any US code.  The ships must meet SOLAS requirements, which are similar to what you mention, but here is what is in the US Code (the US law that enables the SOLAS requirements):

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/46/116.900

 

This is the only standard that the ship needs to meet, not any other "industry standard" that the lawyer claims would apply.

 

Thank you.

 

I understand that, but wanted to put the International and US codes out there, to show that the cruise ships,  MORE than meet the land based codes.

 

So if RCi were wrong with their railing, every apartment with a balcony, many homes with upper floors, raised decks or patios, are worse, and all those owners sued for the potential for harm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Is it an accident?  Yes.  Is it negligent? I don't think a "reasonable person" would think of holding a child out an 11th story window, so Yes.  So, the grandfather's negligent actions led to the accident, and under the law he can be held accountable for his actions.  Just as the parents want RCI held responsible for "negligence" in the design of the ship, the law says that the grandfather can be held responsible for his negligence.

 

This is not an accident.

 

It is a mishap.

 

In most peoples minds, accidents cannot be avoided or controlled.  And this definitely could have be avoided and controlled.

 

It was caused by actions of the parties involved.  It was not unexpected (hanging over a railing then falling is not unexpected), and intentional or unintentional of very little concern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ptf2009 said:

Whenever I see or read anything about this case, all I can think of is:  the grandfather has been punished enough...or how can you punish him more? He has lost is precious granddaughter and has to live with this every second of every day! One would think that through his constant grief and shock, he may not be thinking straight. One would also wonder if the family is regretting their legal action. Perhaps it's just being human to want to blame someone or something else. It was a TERRIBLE accident and my heart goes out to their family.

 

 

So, if it was an uncle that dropped the baby would you still feel this way? How about a cousin? Next door neighbor? Because I can guarantee you that if this action was done by say a child care worker - or say and Adventure Ocean staff member - that person would be in jail by now. I'm sure no one is questioning the horrible lifelong guilt that entire family will have to live  with. That doesn't mean that the GF shouldn't have to pay for his actions. This was not an "accident" - this was an adult doing an action that caused the death of another. Very different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SRF said:

 

This is not an accident.

 

It is a mishap.

 

In most peoples minds, accidents cannot be avoided or controlled.  And this definitely could have be avoided and controlled.

 

It was caused by actions of the parties involved.  It was not unexpected (hanging over a railing then falling is not unexpected), and intentional or unintentional of very little concern.

What is your definition of "mishap"?  Cause everywhere I look it is "an unfortunate accident", and a synonym of "accident".  And, I don't believe that "most people" think accidents cannot be avoided or controlled.  "I was peeling an apple, and had an accident with the knife and cut my finger".  That action could have been avoided or controlled.  But this is parsing semantics.  People are held accountable for "accidents" all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, chengkp75 said:

What is your definition of "mishap"?  Cause everywhere I look it is "an unfortunate accident", and a synonym of "accident".  And, I don't believe that "most people" think accidents cannot be avoided or controlled.  "I was peeling an apple, and had an accident with the knife and cut my finger".  That action could have been avoided or controlled.  But this is parsing semantics.  People are held accountable for "accidents" all the time.

 

Sorry, my profession is occupational health and safety.  Proper use of terminology is important, just like for your profession.

 

And we see a lot of acceptance of "accidents."  "Joe had an accident, it just happened."  Or "X had a car accident, the car just lost control."  And that is why the term mishap is used in the profession.   And just like for ship terms, dictionaries do not always deal with the use in the actual profession.

 

Things, most times, just don't happen. Cars don't just lose control.  But upon calling it an accident, people accept that you can't avoid them and move on.

 

Reality, most (around 99% by most sources) of them are a chain of mistakes and errors leading up with the injury, property loss, or death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

Re: GF

He has been adamant in his innocence and according to articles, isn't willing to even consider a plea bargain (that would in theory limit his punishment).  And yes, while he's not thinking straight, wouldn't that be what the lawyer, family, and friends are there for?  Maybe everyone is suggesting to him that he take the plea deal and he keeps saying "no".  Then he deserves whatever punishment is handed down IMO.  

 

Re: Parents

If they're regretting their legal action, they should be able to stop the lawsuit.  Even if the lawyer balks, they could always fire him.  

Agree and agree.

The video evidence shows he is guilty and he is lucky to be offered a plea bargain because it will end a lot worse for him.

The mam and dad who have responsible jobs need to take their blinkers off because it is clear the GF was stupid or worse.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The grandfather should definitely pay for his actions. I can’t imagine the family not wanting him to. He was totally negligent - accident or not. You don’t hold a child outside of a window. Even sitting them on the railing of that type of window is taking too much of a chance of something bad happening. 
 

If my father did something like that, I would expect him to accept full responsibility and give me and my immediate family time to process what happened and heal. But, I would not heal or deal with him in life in general if he did not accept the fact that he was guilty and totally wrong. I don’t care if people think Royal should have bars on the window. My baby didn’t fall until your dumb*** held her outside of or up to the window. And yes, that is how I would feel about my dad at the time. I would still love him but would need time away from him.   Some people play too much. You’ll hear some older relatives say “I did this with you and you weren’t  hurt” — ie not using seat belts and car seats, etc. But, when you’re caring for someone else’s child, you exercise extra care because they’re not yours. You make sure that they don’t come to any harm. And, if they do, you deal with the consequences and accept the blame. 
 

Praying for the family. But, the daughter and son in law need to stop blaming the cruise line for the tragedy, deal with their family issues and try to heal and move forward. Royal should not pay a dime, and grandfather should serve jail time and attend some type of classes to deal with whatever issues he has. 
 

And if that wasn’t my dad and just someone my mom married later in life - who didn’t raise me and I didn’t have a strong connection to -  not sure where I’d be. Just my thoughts. (Sedated I’m sure - until the thoughts of doing him harm left my mind.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, nadinenurse1 said:

And the other statements.. she used to bang on the glass at hockey’s games (maybe hockey),  why the heck do u all let her do that...that glass. could  have broken, fallen out ,  give me a break GF appears to me to have not been ,ever been, the -best watcher for a toddler

 

Besides, hockey rink plexiglass or tempered glass is most likely much more durable than the window pane glass.

Edited by Another_Critic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Two Wheels Only said:

 

Anello is actually the step-grandfather. He's only 51 and married Chloe's mother's mother. Anello works in IT so nothing runs in the family as far as being a police officer for Anello.

 

51?  😲  Looks like this "mishap" aged him at least 10 years!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Another_Critic said:

 

51?  😲  Looks like this "mishap" aged him at least 10 years!

 

20296696-7623427-image-a-37_157229663807

 

This picture was taken when Anello returned to Chicago about 4 days after the incident.

Edited by Two Wheels Only

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She likes to bang on the glass, well that's interesting.  But whatever, let her bang on the glass that is at her standing height (like she did at the hockey game).  No need to elevate her to and over the railing.

Edited by soremekun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, soremekun said:

She likes to bang on the glass, well that's interesting.  But whatever, let her bang on the glass that is at her standing height (like she did at the hockey game).  Those panes do not open.  No need to elevate her to and over the railing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all those on this thread that are insinuating that in any way this was an intentional act by the GF, I strongly disagree and really dislike seeing such accusations.  While I do believe the GF is solely responsible for this child's death I find it very hard to believe there was anything intentional here.  

 

I was one of those who said maybe heat got to him, after all he appears to be a larger man from Indiana and this incident happened in July in San Juan.  I am not sure when they arrived in San Juan but they may not have been used to the heat and humidity, hey I live in the south and it still gets to me certain days.  There are so many reasons why this could have happened including just plain poor judgement but we will most likely never know why.   I am not even sure the GF knows what happened, I am sure he has blocked a lot of it out as many do in such situations.  Honestly there is no reason for any of us to know, other than curiosity, and rightfully so since none of us are involved personally.  Hopefully we do find that Royal is cleared 100% of wrongdoing but I fear it will end up settled somehow and we will never hear.

 

I do realize this hits some harder than others, I have grandkids of my own around her age, but maybe it's time for some here to step back away from this thread.  So far it's been mostly a friendly discussion, let's keep it that way so it doesn't get locked or deleted.

 

One other comment that I have not seen mentioned, it appears the family/attorney is saying there are 13 security cameras in the area of the ship where this happened.  They are saying the one released is a deceiving angle and want the rest to show a different story.  Not sure how they would but seems they continue to grasp at straws in their defense.  Afraid this isn't going anywhere soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I can think of that the lawyer is referring to as "industry standards" is for windows in a high-rise building... which obviously don't apply to ships.

(Remember how Eric Clapton's young son fell out of a high rise apartment window almost thirty years ago?)  

What the lawyer is trying to do is compare the obviously outdoor pool deck area to a comparable indoor situation.  Anyone who has ever been on a ship will know that the open air pool deck is NOT an indoor, totally enclosed facility.  

There are no railings in the Windjammer or Main Dining Room or even Oceanview Staterooms, because none of those windows open to the outside.  There are railings on all of the balconies, sun decks, observation decks, and pool decks, because all of those have ways to access the outside.


I am heartened to see that Royal has finally commented on the absurdity of the lawsuit, and that they evidently intend to fight this rather than just making it go away with a settlement.  

Plain and simple, the only person responsible for this tragic event is the step-grandfather, who is either lying outright or has developed some sort of mental block regarding the events of that afternoon.  

 

 

Edited by brillohead
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, akcruz said:

One other comment that I have not seen mentioned, it appears the family/attorney is saying there are 13 security cameras in the area of the ship where this happened.  They are saying the one released is a deceiving angle and want the rest to show a different story.  Not sure how they would but seems they continue to grasp at straws in their defense.  Afraid this isn't going anywhere soon.

There are views from two security cameras.  One from the side, and one basically from behind.  They pretty much show the same thing.  I think the lawyer is grasping at straws.  Remember he edited the video he gave to CBS so it would show the GF in a better light.  Take anything he says with a mountain of salt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

There are views from two security cameras.  One from the side, and one basically from behind.  They pretty much show the same thing.  I think the lawyer is grasping at straws.  Remember he edited the video he gave to CBS so it would show the GF in a better light.  Take anything he says with a mountain of salt. 

 

There have been videos released from two security cameras, we do not know how many other views exist.

Share this post


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

 

He was offered a plea deal that would have given him no jail time & probation. Not taking that deal is the 2nd stupidest thing that he has ever done.

 

 

 

 WOW..I didn't know that. Do you know if RCI ever tried to settle with the family?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, reallyitsmema said:

 

There have been videos released from two security cameras, we do not know how many other views exist.

According to the poster I quoted, the lawyer is saying the ONE released is at a "deceiving" angle.  But there's been two released.

 

I HIGHLY doubt there are 13 cameras that cover that corner of the deck.  There might be 13 cameras on the pool deck, or even in that 1/3 of the deck, but there's no way there are 13 cameras looking at the same space. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KelSny1011 said:

 WOW..I didn't know that. Do you know if RCI ever tried to settle with the family?  

From Dec 18:

There's no plea deal in writing yet, according to the attorney representing the Indiana grandfather. But he tells CBS News the agreement would require Anello to plead guilty to negligent homicide in the death of Wiegand. In exchange, he would get no jail time and minimum probation and supervision.

 

Source

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...