Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
ATC cruiser

Toddler Death Law Suit Update

Recommended Posts

I haven't seen anyone mention...the mother sharing her "last picture" of Chloe, which was the little girl in her bathing suit and white sun hat on, standing at the kids water park before it happened. There are some wet spots where she is standing (would never know if it's actually from Chloe or another child/person) but it's possible she could have been playing in that water, wet and slippery...making it even more dangerous to pick up a child in these circumstances (near a window). Obviously the direction that Chloe was coming from was from that water park area before heading toward the window.

 

Also the whole "color blind" thing doesn't mean they are blind and can't see. Most instances mean they can see perfectly clear and just have a problem distinguishing the real color. We may see the real color and they see a slightly different color. But they can still see. Although there's different types of color blindness, in my experience with people I have known over the many years that suffered from this, they all could see exactly what I was seeing with no problem...just a different color at times. But you should be able to tell there's a window there or not.

 

This whole situation is sad.

Share this post


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


I wonder if the GF is in the the beginning stages a health issues that has not yet been determined, such as a brain tumour.  It can take months for it to be discovered but in the meantime it changes the actions of the individual even though they seem to be healthy.
 

 My father had one, which eventually cancer took his life.  It wasn’t until after it was discovered that we understand some of his uncharacteristic actions. He just wasn’t his serious self, he was joking and light hearted. The diagnosis helped to connect the dots for us.
 

I know, it’s only as suggestion but I can’t think of any other semi-logical explanation. 

 

I wonder if the heat was getting to the GF.  You can see him squat down before going over to the window.  Was he sticking his head out to find a breeze to cool off?  Did he pick up the granddaughter because he wanted the fresh air instead if squatting down by her?  I am pretty sure we will never know what truly happened that day.  Not sure the GF really knows either and since he's the only family member that was there it all just leads to speculation. 

 

Bottom line is a child is no longer here and the family is hurting.  I hope they can see through their grief to realize Royal is not responsible in any way and by keep pushing this lawsuit it only makes them look money hungry.  Hopefully this is all over shortly and we can all move on.

Share this post


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

 But you should be able to tell there's a window there or not.

 

This whole situation is sad.

Yes, for sure, especially if you, like Grandpa, actually leaned over the railing with his entire upper body and leaned OUT of the window on  two separate occasions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were chairs there that he could have sat down in, I don't understand why he squatted down by the pillar unless, as another poster said, the heat and activity was getting to him.

Share this post


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

 But you should be able to tell there's a window there or not.

This whole situation is sad.

 

1 hour ago, boscobeans said:

Yes, for sure, especially if you, like Grandpa, actually leaned over the railing with his entire upper body and leaned OUT of the window on  two separate occasions

and actually held his GD beyond the window frame for something like 34 seconds before he dropped her.

It's simply unbelievable he didn't know that there was window where he was and it was open.

Edited by robtulipe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, tonit964 said:

There were chairs there that he could have sat down in, I don't understand why he squatted down by the pillar unless, as another poster said, the heat and activity was getting to him.

Or he squatted down to talk to Chloe. You know, the whole "get down on their level" thing. 

Share this post


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

Or he squatted down to talk to Chloe. You know, the whole "get down on their level" thing. 

That's what it looked like to me.  She was right there.

Share this post


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

I am by no means an expert, but just reading some fiction (John Grisham comes to mind), that's how I would expect a contract to be done... contingency PLUS expenses.  Which still means if they lose the case, the lawyer gets nothing and the client is out no money.

 

But would it be "normal" for a contract to be written so the client has to pay for lawyer's expenses if they decide to drop the case?  

 

My experience is that the lawyer get X% if they win.  All expenses come out of their X%.

 

In the case I mentioned, the lawyer got X%, and then billed for his time on top of that, his paralegal expenses on top of that, and other expenses on top of that.

 

So he got the same amount as if it was NOT a contingency case (hours and expenses), PLUS X% of the judgement.

 

Again, my experience is, if the case get thrown out or dropped (mutual agreement) the lawyer is out whatever time and expenses he put into it.

 

I am not a lawyer. 

Share this post


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

Him picking up Chloe and holding her over the railing was intentional and deliberate.  I hope you're not implying that he intentionally let her go. 

 

Nobody by he knows if that was the case.  But also, nobody by he knows if it was not.

 

It may be horrific to consider that there are people like that in the world, but there are.

Share this post


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

There's nothing graphic or heart stopping in the video. Just know, it pretty much exonerates Royal Caribbean 100% of any wrong doing. To me, it looks almost intentional, no accident. Horrible to say, but that's how blatantly stupid the GF's actions were.

 

That is why I am against using the term "accident."

 

Most are NOT accidents.  They are due to unsafe acts or unsafe conditions.  Neither of which are "accidental."

Share this post


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

 

My experience is that the lawyer get X% if they win.  All expenses come out of their X%.

 

In the case I mentioned, the lawyer got X%, and then billed for his time on top of that, his paralegal expenses on top of that, and other expenses on top of that.

 

So he got the same amount as if it was NOT a contingency case (hours and expenses), PLUS X% of the judgement.

 

Again, my experience is, if the case get thrown out or dropped (mutual agreement) the lawyer is out whatever time and expenses he put into it.

 

I am not a lawyer. 

If that is true, why would anybody take the case unless they were sure that there would either be a settlement or they could win?

Share this post


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

If that is true, why would anybody take the case unless they were sure that there would either be a settlement or they could win?

 

Because they take 10 cases.  They win or settle 5 of them for an average of $1 million per case.    At 40% payback, they just got $2 million for those 10 cases. 

 

And if their actual costs are maybe $25,000 per case, they are WAY ahead.

 

Some local lawyer commercials claim they have earned more than $1 BILLION for their clients.  I would take 40% of that.

 

And how many hours do you need to bill for $400,000,000 in income?????

 

At an average of $400 per hour (for easy math), that is 1,000,000 hours.  Or 41,666 days of 24 hours per day.  Or 114 YEARS at 24 hours per day, 365 days per year.

 

And yes, if they think there is no way to win or get a settlement, they don't take the case.   So their win % may be well over the 50% of my example.  Say they only take cases they are sure to win.  Then, they earn $4 million for those 10 cases.

 

When did you make $4 million dollars??????

Edited by SRF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2020 at 2:42 PM, Another_Critic said:

 

Not defending him, but once again, only HE knows what he knew regarding the window.

 

He denied knowing in several interviews, but was it a lie or the truth?  Only HE knows.

 

But, it's hard to believe, based on public evidence, that he did not know.

 

The human mind works in mysterious ways.

Based on this logic, nobody knows anything about anything other than what THEY subjectively want to believe about it.  Therefore my truth is mine and I'm sticking with it.  Faced with overwhelming  video evidence you simply maintain YOUR truth and YOU should not be doubted about YOUR truth.  Simply a case of the Grandfather's attempt to shift blame so he can live with himself and in the process get a settlement from RCCL.  The video is a  lawsuit ender, any thinking person can see that.  Even if a jury with people who refuse to recognize the truth because of sympathy for the family on appeal it would sink like a rock.  

 

Share this post


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

 

Because they take 10 cases.  They win or settle 5 of them for an average of $1 million per case.    At 40% payback, they just got $2 million for those 10 cases. 

 

And if their actual costs are maybe $25,000 per case, they are WAY ahead.

 

Some local lawyer commercials claim they have earned more than $1 BILLION for their clients.  I would take 40% of that.

 

And how many hours do you need to bill for $400,000,000 in income?????

 

At an average of $400 per hour (for easy math), that is 1,000,000 hours.  Or 41,666 days of 24 hours per day.  Or 114 YEARS at 24 hours per day, 365 days per year.

 

And yes, if they think there is no way to win or get a settlement, they don't take the case.   So their win % may be well over the 50% of my example.  Say they only take cases they are sure to win.  Then, they earn $4 million for those 10 cases.

 

When did you make $4 million dollars??????

Unless you are a top notch personal injury attorney, every case is not worth a million dollars. Most cases settle, for well well below six figures. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the case. But the local firm advertising that they have won over a BILLION, that is some serious money.

 

But think about it, if they were not making money doing this, why would they keep doing it?

 

And, I don't know about your area, but in mine, they advertise a LOT.  And that COSTS money.  So they are making enough to advertise that much and still make money.

 

But say they average $100,000. 10 cases is $1 million.  They earn $400,000.  Still not bad.  And it is not like they are doing 10 cases per year.  More likely 10 per month.

Share this post


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

If that is true, why would anybody take the case unless they were sure that there would either be a settlement or they could win?

 

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's also a lot of competition among certain echelons of personal injury attorneys, to get cases - especially the newsworthy ones - so they quickly pounce and offer to "take no fees unless we win your case" (ambulance chasing).  The offer may be true to a certain extent but most of the time does not include things like filing fees, court fees, expert fees or outside attorney fees - the gamble being that the defendant or the insurance company offer to settle the case before it's necessary to incur any of those fees.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our whole system needs overhauling.. My company got sued (along with others) in a wrongful death on a roadway construction site. The lawyers know (on both sides) what the cost is to defend yourselves if it goes to trial and it becomes a game of whether you want to pay that cost to make the suit go way or not. Best bet is to get the suit thrown out (summary judgement) quickly

Edited by Tulsacoker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My heart goes out to this family, and to the grandfather.  I think he really does believe his story that he picked her up so she could "bang on the class."  I'm sure his brain has shut down when it comes to remembering the real story.  

 

The reality is that she was already AT the glass, when she was standing at his feet!  The photo the family released of her at the hockey game, showed her standing by herself at the glass. While we can't see exactly what she's doing in the cruise ship video, I think it's reasonable to think that she walked over to the glass, so she could bang on it.  So that's what she was probably doing at her grandfather's feet.  There would be no reason for her to ask him to "pick her up so she could bang on the glass."

 

While the grandfather was to blame for her death, the villain here is their lawyer.  Instead of giving the family time to process what had happened, and look at the evidence, he's filed a very public, very malicious lawsuit before Chloe's body had even been returned to the States.  

 

 

Edited by JsMom2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JsMom2... I thought that as well.. the hockey picture showed her on the ground banging on the glass and she was doing that on the ship... no reason to pick her up especially as the GF had put his upper body out of the window and there was no glass to bang on higher up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the current video released, it's hard to use the "bagging on the glass" excuse now.

 

So next would if there is a "federal industry toddler safety standard" that RCI broke by having these glass-less windows?  To me that is the only viable thing this attorney and family have at this point.

 

Also, what will this new video play in the negligent homicide case against the GF? 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Also, what will this new video play in the negligent homicide case against the GF? 

I would suspect the police have had this video for a while 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People here are familiar with cruise ships, and know that it is not easy to accidently drop a child out a window unless you are doing something stupid. But what about the general public? Does anyone have any feedback from non-cruising friends who might believe the story that it is easy to fall out those windows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2020 at 1:51 PM, BeachChik said:

It still was an accident. He didn't deliberately drop her.

But he was extremely negligent besides being an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately there are people who believe news stories about people who “fell” off cruise ships.  And the media and family were initially saying the accident occurred in a children’s play area where a window was negligently left open.  If one is not following later developments/reporting that could be all someone knows.

 

My brother heard part of the story when it first happened and thought a child had fallen out of a window.  That was probably what was actually reported.  Of course, the child did not fall out of a window.  Tragically she was dropped.

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...