Jump to content

Toddler Death Law Suit Update


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, The_Big_M said:

 

Oh, that's cool then. They should also drop the case against RCL as they should also 'know that RCL would never put Chloe in harm's way either...'

In a previous article (sorry, I don't feel like trying to find it), they said the case against the GF should be dropped so they could grieve properly (or something like that).  But apparently the civil case against RCI doesn't stop them from grieving?  The logic of this family floors me.

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

In a previous article (sorry, I don't feel like trying to find it), they said the case against the GF should be dropped so they could grieve properly (or something like that).  But apparently the civil case against RCI doesn't stop them from grieving?  The logic of this family floors me.

The whole scenario sounds suspicious.

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

US Judge D L Graham disagrees with you , Motion to dismiss denied ..

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7974255/Parents-toddler-fell-death-Royal-Caribbean-ship-proceed-lawsuit.html

 

 

Actually, no.  The judge denied the motion to dismiss, because the arguments presented by RCI went beyond answering the plaintiffs' accusations, and into the area of "discovery".  Discovery evidence is when a case has been deemed justified to go to trial, and each side must present it's evidence to the other side.  The judge said that RCI could refile their motion to dismiss, if it limited it's arguments to "the four corners of the plaintiff's complaint".  This does not mean the judge decided the suit had merit, and warranted a trial, it just means he felt the motion by RCI was not in correct format.

 

The judge also required RCI to answer in 5 days to the claim that they did not present all video evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just off Mariner OTS. I don’t know for sure if the pool deck windows are the same design in Mariner as they are on Freedom but I checked out those windows. 


I’m just under 5’2” tall. The guard rail is at my chest level so I certainly can not get my head close to the Window frame. However, at my short stature, I could extend my arms and touch the glass. So..... there is that. 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2020 at 8:24 AM, S.A.M.J.R. said:

Sorry, I don't see that.

 

Just need to look closer.  The guy in the white shirt is sitting down and it appears the grandfather slides into his personal space and he lifts up his arm to move the GF away from his space.  The GF appears to turn with only one hand on GD then the guy in the white shirt and his buddy get up and walk away.  Only a couple a seconds later they go back to a different window (as do other passengers) to "rubber neck".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just watched the video linked above and if I were on a jury I would see- the grandfather leaning out over the railing enough that he would know whether or not the window was open which would lead me to conclude that he was grossly negligent in picking his grand-daughter up and holding her over the railing. Whether I would vote to convict in negligent homicide would depend greatly on other submitted evidence and the exact definition given to the jury. I would also conclude that Royal was not at fault. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Junkhouse said:

Just need to look closer.  The guy in the white shirt is sitting down and it appears the grandfather slides into his personal space and he lifts up his arm to move the GF away from his space.  The GF appears to turn with only one hand on GD then the guy in the white shirt and his buddy get up and walk away.  Only a couple a seconds later they go back to a different window (as do other passengers) to "rubber neck".

 

If the GD not been a precarious position it would not have mattered if there was a bump or not.  

 

It's like some sort of time, space, continuum from Back to the Future. If there was only some way to go back in time to stop this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

I just watched the video linked above and if I were on a jury I would see- the grandfather leaning out over the railing enough that he would know whether or not the window was open which would lead me to conclude that he was grossly negligent in picking his grand-daughter up and holding her over the railing. Whether I would vote to convict in negligent homicide would depend greatly on other submitted evidence and the exact definition given to the jury. I would also conclude that Royal was not at fault. 

If it was cut and dried, why didn't the judge dismiss it the other day? There has to be more evidence, pro and con, than one tape.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, grandgeezer said:

If it was cut and dried, why didn't the judge dismiss it the other day? There has to be more evidence, pro and con, than one tape.

As Chief said in 1229 RCI included more in their motion than they should have. In any event it is a piece of evidence that needs to be considered if ultimately the motion to dismiss is really denied. I am sure that there is a lot of evidence and a lot of testimony but for me that video says it all and it would take a lot of other evidence to make me think otherwise. A motion to dismiss is based on the legal aspects, not the evidentiary aspects because juries decide on the evidence, judges decide on the law (unless it's a bench trial).

Edited by sparks1093
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, grandgeezer said:

If it was cut and dried, why didn't the judge dismiss it the other day? There has to be more evidence, pro and con, than one tape.

 

Cases are rarely dismissed on summary judgment. Judges usually like to give plaintiffs their day in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

regarding Mr. Anello, there wasn't anything wrong with the boat. there's a reason why you don't put kids on railings. Window or no window.

 

I agree, summary judgment is usually not granted at this point. And as noted the judge indicated why it wasn't dismissed and it has nothing to do with the content of the video.

Edited by makiramarlena
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, emdia43 said:

As a juror my conclusion would have to be - he was holding her, he let go of her.

OR.......Chloe may have squirmed out of his grip. He should have expected that could happen. What the heck was he thinking?

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, coffeebean said:

OR.......Chloe may have squirmed out of his grip. He should have expected that could happen. What the heck was he thinking?

Step GF was not thinking and that is the problem with what happened to Chloe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2020 at 6:57 PM, Domino D said:

 

Yes mam, that is what I am saying.  I would never be able to shake the quilt of not protecting my child, no matter how he or she fell to harm.  That said, I am pretty sure that I would also be able to find blame with Royal, the person who built the ship, the people who create the regulations, the port authority, the other passengers, and lastly God.  While this is unfair, it is also honest.  Unfortunately, I have friends who lost children in tragedies and have watched them take on many issues and institutions as a result.

 

So, yes I would want to push for changes to prevent it happening to anyone else.  This is not about who is responsible, it is about prevention.  It would likely become my mission to change cruise ship regulations and policies to make this less likely to happen again.  30 Years ago people were not required to wear seat belts or place children in car seats, people were expected to simply drive carefully.  Unfortunately, tragedies are the way that laws, regulations, and policies evolve.  Why would anyone be opposed to more signage?  Why would anyone care if the hand rail were pulled 2 feet further from the window, making it even less likely that anyone could lean far enough out to fall over or drop something?  Why would anyone be opposed to them putting a bolted window stop to keep the window from being completely open?  

 

I think there is a lot wrong with this country, including our newly found inability to tolerate anyone with a different opinion.  You are welcome to your opinion and to express it, as am I.  One of the best things about America is that you and I have the right to discuss this, and the family has the right to challenge if Royal should have done more to protect their child.  The courts will decide this, the family will be in pain no matter what, and Royal will be fine no matter what.  

 

My thoughts are not who is to blame, or if a reasonable person would do this.  My thoughts are only about, "How do we keep this from happening again?"  A child is dead, and Royal does not need any of our protection.  I believe the family has ever right to raise the issue, you do not.  Reasonable people can disagree without destroying a while county.  

 

I hope I never have occasion to find out how one acts in this situation, I sincerely hope you never find out either. 

 

So, we need to put a bubble over the ship, because some people are too something to understand falling from the 14th deck is bad?

 

Wow.... simply wow.

 

jc

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

Step GF was not thinking and that is the problem with what happened to Chloe.

That's a bit of an understatement.  Anyone who could display such weapons grade stupidity while charged with the care of a toddler shouldn't be allowed to watch a house plant let alone someones child.  If it's proven that alcohol or other substances were a contributing factor and not just idiotic carelessness then I hope and pray that the maximum punishment possible is handed down.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is like reading a mystery "who done it" novel.

So many Ideas and twists and turns. So many different thoughts on what could be or not.

 

I actually enjoy reading and following everyone's views, how unfortunate it is at the cost of little Chloe, which I must say no matter how it  happened and whatever the outcome ------- she is gone (May she rest in peace).  And had this event not happened, we would not be expressing our opinion  (no kidding).

 

It is not our fault, nor do I believe in expressing our views that we are not caring concerning followers.  Just that we curious and read others take on this situation.

 

As for the outcome, only time will tell, and then I cannot wait to see where this thread will go.

 

Thank you for letting me express my take on this situation..........I have been lurking for awhile and only posted here once or twice.

 

Take care.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter how regulations are changed and how many safety measures are put in place, you can’t protect people from themselves. People find a way to circumvent safety measures all of the time. You can’t fix carelessness or stupidity. Eventually, you’ll have windows on cruise ships with the slots that open to allow air inside (like some high rise buildings)  because people just can’t seem to stay onboard. Or maybe, they’ll have the large fences that point inward like highway overpasses now - that keep idiots from throwing rocks on cars passing underneath. Balconies will offer a view but will be enclosed and have sliding plexiglass that will only open 6 inches.  It never ends. 
 

In the past, people would take more responsibility for their own actions. People suffered tragedies and didn’t expect to get millions of dollars for their loss.  The piers of the islands that we visit don’t have railings to prevent you from falling over. But, many of the docks that non-employees visit around here do because they know that some idiot will fall in and sue because there  were no “safety measures” to prevent them. 
 

Things can probably be improved, but companies should not have to shoulder all of the cost and blame for someone else’s negligence. 

Edited by madiaka
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Seville2Cabo said:

So not sure if I read this on one of the news links or someone here said it, but I thought the GF said he saw the fall all the way down.  If that is the case, I guess he could lean out the window and the pictures the family lawyer showed were false.

Yes, it has been reported that he said that he saw her fall all of the way down.  This would not have been possible unless he leaned over the railing far enough.


"I saw her fall. I saw her fall the whole way down. I saw her fall, and I was just in disbelief. I was like, 'Oh my God,' ... And then I just remember screaming that I thought there was glass," he said."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cruise-ship-death-salvatore-anello-grandfather-charged-death-of-chloe-wiegand-says-hes-colorblind/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TNcruising02 said:

Yes, it has been reported that he said that he saw her fall all of the way down.  This would not have been possible unless he leaned over the railing far enough.


He could have watched through the glass, too.... the glass goes all the way to the floor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, brillohead said:


He could have watched through the glass, too.... the glass goes all the way to the floor.


That's true.  I wonder how fast a person falls.  If he held her on the window frame and she fell forward, would he have had time to  fall to the ground and watch her fall all of the way down?  Could you see someone fall all of the way down the side of the ship from the lower window or would you need to be at the railing height looking down?  It seems she would not have fallen more than 12 inches from the side of the ship unless she was flung over.  Just speculating.  I would have to be at those windows to know for sure. 

Where she landed would probably be a clue.

Edited by TNcruising02
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2020 at 10:04 AM, MommaBear55 said:

It's a sad subject, the family will never be the same. The grandfather just can't accept the responsibility. 

And neither can the rest of the family accept his total responsibility !!!

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
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with Barbara Muckermann, CMO Silversea Cruises
      • ICYM Our Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • 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
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...