Grandpa from Cruise ship tragedy charged

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ Just to expand on Strathmore -- I'm 5'8" & the railing in front of the first row of the balcony came to my thigh as I was walking by it.

That's how low it is, and that's how easy it would have been to topple over it as you passed in front of someone else trying to get to your seat.

Have you bothered to read any articles with pictures? It is very clear the railing is not midthigh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So maybe he couldn't see the tint color (I have my doubts, but let's grant it). He could certainly see that this one window was different from all the others.

1. He went straight to that one window.
2. Someone else who has been on one of these ships recently posted here on DCUM that although the windows on their deck were not tinted, you could clearly see the difference.

So did he think the rest of them were open, and this was the only closed one? Or what?

Makes no sense.

I was the one who posted that not only was I on a Royal Caribbean's ship, but I was on THIS very exact ship that this tragedy occurred on, not 30 days prior to this.

Let me clear something up... the windows are definitely marked clear and then tinted, clear and then tinted & so on... the differences are very, very obvious -- like night and day.

My father in-law has color blindness, in fact he has the rarest color blindness in the world called Tritanopia, which makes it very difficult to distinguish blues & yellows and even HE could tell which windows were locked and which were open... so that theory could never hold water & I'll tell you why.

It couldn't be color blindness because those that are color blind have been color blind their entire lives, which means they've ALWAYS seen colors the way it looks to them, which means their eyes have always adapted to view colors that way -- whatever they're seeing looks normal to them... the tint included.

I could see this argument standing up if the grandfather was normal sighted his whole life and then all of a sudden one day became color blind (which is impossible, btw), then sure, if this were possibile he may have had confusion.

However, the way he sees blue tint is the way he's always seen blue tint for his entire life, so this looks normal to him... nothing would be confusing.

I hope I'm making sense?

Lastly, and I've started this before... even if the man were 1000% legally blind, there's no possible way that he could have mistaken an open window from a window that never opens, because there are trade winds that rush through the window spitting salt water directly on your face as if you were standing directly in front of a running fan. This occurs from the moment you enter the ship (while being docked in port) throughout your entire journey.

If you've ever been on this very ship (as I have), it's absolutely infuriating to hear this lawyer talk about this being a "children's play area" (fyi, it's anything BUT a play area! This is a high traffic foot/walking area that is a constant pathway to get to and from entertainment areas (bar/pools/food/tables, etc) & it would be one of the very last places I'd ever put a baby down to play, for fear of them getting stepped on/run over). That in addition to this whole window theory are just ridiculous.

I don't care what this so-called "video" shows, I know the exact location this tragedy occurred and this lawyer's story doesn't add up AT ALL.
I honestly can't see a jury feeling anything but INSULTED that they he thinks they're stupid enough to believe the BS that he's peddling.

I really can't believe the lengths he/they will go through just to pin this entire tragedy on the cruise ship company.

True. Never been on this ship, but obvious from photos of the scene, it's a bustling pedestrian walkway connecting different areas. It looks like the security gate entry at the airport. There's no toys or or playground equipment in the photographs, not even a book! Lawyers flip the facts all the time hoping it will stick . the lawyer probably thought the cute baby will influence the jury.

I don’t believe grandpa and lawyer, but people can and do develop colorblindness. I know because my mom developed it and had to retire. But even google could have told you that.

It's not the same.
I'm an ophthalmologist and your mom didn't develop color blindness randomly or from old age, she developed it from either an injury or an eye disease that damaged the optic nerve or the retina of the eye, such as glaucoma.

The PP with the color blind father in-law is correct, acquired color blindness is different than color blindness (which stems from genetics and developed from birth and which is what the grandfather in question supposedly has).

That PP is correct in stating that what the grandfather sees is normal to him, as it's the only vision he's been accustom to for his entire life.

---

And to the PP who said there should be signs about the "dangers of railings"... really??

Falling off of a cruise ship because the railing was too low is one thing, and that is negligible (has anyone ever seen the railing on the balcony at Strathmore?? I sat in the very first row and was terrified walking in front of others to get to our seats. It was such a narrow walkway, I was holding onto our 8 year old son for dear life, as I was afraid he was going to actually fall over!).

However, when do we stop shifting the blame off on others for our own impulsive negligence and start making people accountable for their own FREE (and reckless) WILL?

I don't feel the grandfather should be charged, as they've suffered enough - but I also feel that placing blame where there isn't any is equally wrong.

This was a horrific accident, but an accident nonetheless.
RC isn't at fault, the grandfather was negligent. Unintentionally negligent, but negligent just the same.

Do you think that his color blindness prevented him from being able to tell that the window was open. It sure looks open in every picture and video I've seen, but I'm not color blind.

A blind person could tell the window was open.
A colorblind person could tell the window was open.

[Anonymous]

The plan from the beginning was to try and win the case in the court of public opinion and squeeze out a settlement payment t from the cruise line. Lawyer/fPR/family/grandpa didn’t expect Grandpa to be charged with criminal negligent homicide. But they’re sticking to the same game plane.

[Anonymous]

I don't think that's a reasonable imagining.

[Anonymous]

I doubt the parents watched the video.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The plan from the beginning was to try and win the case in the court of public opinion and squeeze out a settlement payment from the cruise line. Lawyer/fPR/family/grandpa didn’t expect Grandpa to be charged with criminal negligent homicide. But they’re sticking to the same game plan.

And even if the parents saw the video and watch grandpa suspend the child in open air for 25 seconds before she fell to her death, the parents still publicly stick with the plan (who knows what happens privately). If they turn on Grandpa, they’ll never get a payout.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The plan from the beginning was to try and win the case in the court of public opinion and squeeze out a settlement payment from the cruise line. Lawyer/fPR/family/grandpa didn’t expect Grandpa to be charged with criminal negligent homicide. But they’re sticking to the same game plan.

And even if the parents saw the video and watch grandpa suspend the child in open air for 25 seconds before she fell to her death, the parents still publicly stick with the plan (who knows what happens privately). If they turn on Grandpa, they’ll never get a payout.

That's the ticket. They want their payout and once they get that THEN they'll turn on Grandpa. First things first, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The plan from the beginning was to try and win the case in the court of public opinion and squeeze out a settlement payment from the cruise line. Lawyer/fPR/family/grandpa didn’t expect Grandpa to be charged with criminal negligent homicide. But they’re sticking to the same game plan.

And even if the parents saw the video and watch grandpa suspend the child in open air for 25 seconds before she fell to her death, the parents still publicly stick with the plan (who knows what happens privately). If they turn on Grandpa, they’ll never get a payout.

That's the ticket. They want their payout and once they get that THEN they'll turn on Grandpa. First things first, please.

Stick to the plan. Eyes on the prize.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The plan from the beginning was to try and win the case in the court of public opinion and squeeze out a settlement payment from the cruise line. Lawyer/fPR/family/grandpa didn’t expect Grandpa to be charged with criminal negligent homicide. But they’re sticking to the same game plan.

And even if the parents saw the video and watch grandpa suspend the child in open air for 25 seconds before she fell to her death, the parents still publicly stick with the plan (who knows what happens privately). If they turn on Grandpa, they’ll never get a payout.

That's the ticket. They want their payout and once they get that THEN they'll turn on Grandpa. First things first, please.

I don't think he "suspended the child in open air for 25 seconds before she fell to her death." I think people are making logic leaps from the statement that he held her above the rail. That could mean that he literally held her above the rail with her feet on the railing. It doesn't necessarily mean that he held her out the window or high above the rail. If you know anything about babies and toddlers, they like to flex and release their legs. If you try to stand them on your lap for instance, they will bend their legs without warning and you have to kind of go with them as you hold them b/c they wiggle left and right and up and down. It's possible that he stood her on the railing (I believe he says he did this), and that he didn't have a good grip on her and she bent her legs and/or slipped her feet off the railing --- and straight out of his arm/hand. (I believe he said he was only holding her with one arm/hand when she fell, as he was using the other arm to reach out (or so he says).

That said, of course, he was negligent in putting her up there. And he probably did not have a lot of experience with babies (even though the mother claims that the baby was the grandpa's "best friend" --- which is just weird), so he made a huge mistake in how he was holding her -- probably unfamiliar with how wiggly and unpredictable toddlers can be.

I completely expect that grandma will divorce (step) grandpa after the dust settles on the criminal and civil suits. I don't think the grandmother and the toddler's parents will be able to accept him/the sight of him once they no longer need to pretend they are one team against Royal Caribbean.

[Anonymous]

https://www.reddit.com/r/insaneparents/comments/er0jyt/i_dont_even_know_what_the_hell_he_thought_he_was/

Video 'proves' grandfather dangled toddler out of Royal Caribbean window for THIRTY SECONDS before fatally dropping her, cruise line says

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7903215/Video-grandfather-dangled-toddler-Royal-Caribbean-window-THIRTY-SECONDS.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.reddit.com/r/insaneparents/comments/er0jyt/i_dont_even_know_what_the_hell_he_thought_he_was/

Video 'proves' grandfather dangled toddler out of Royal Caribbean window for THIRTY SECONDS before fatally dropping her, cruise line says

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7903215/Video-grandfather-dangled-toddler-Royal-Caribbean-window-THIRTY-SECONDS.html

I believe the grandfather didn’t realize or seriously underestimated the number of surveillance cameras. He lied believing that no one would be able to refute his story. Once they told him about the video, it was too late and became a situation of that’s the story and I am sticking to it.

[Anonymous]

Just because he has no biological children, that's not an excuse for poor judgment handling baby.

I have no biological children, but I babysat for lots of families and grew up with younger cousins. Even I'm aware how toddlers and babies squirm, kick their legs out and don't have good control over their limbs. Grandpa spent enough time with this baby to know better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The plan from the beginning was to try and win the case in the court of public opinion and squeeze out a settlement payment from the cruise line. Lawyer/fPR/family/grandpa didn’t expect Grandpa to be charged with criminal negligent homicide. But they’re sticking to the same game plan.

And even if the parents saw the video and watch grandpa suspend the child in open air for 25 seconds before she fell to her death, the parents still publicly stick with the plan (who knows what happens privately). If they turn on Grandpa, they’ll never get a payout.

That's the ticket. They want their payout and once they get that THEN they'll turn on Grandpa. First things first, please.

I don't think he "suspended the child in open air for 25 seconds before she fell to her death." I think people are making logic leaps from the statement that he held her above the rail. That could mean that he literally held her above the rail with her feet on the railing. It doesn't necessarily mean that he held her out the window or high above the rail. If you know anything about babies and toddlers, they like to flex and release their legs. If you try to stand them on your lap for instance, they will bend their legs without warning and you have to kind of go with them as you hold them b/c they wiggle left and right and up and down. It's possible that he stood her on the railing (I believe he says he did this), and that he didn't have a good grip on her and she bent her legs and/or slipped her feet off the railing --- and straight out of his arm/hand. (I believe he said he was only holding her with one arm/hand when she fell, as he was using the other arm to reach out (or so he says).

That said, of course, he was negligent in putting her up there. And he probably did not have a lot of experience with babies (even though the mother claims that the baby was the grandpa's "best friend" --- which is just weird), so he made a huge mistake in how he was holding her -- probably unfamiliar with how wiggly and unpredictable toddlers can be.

I completely expect that grandma will divorce (step) grandpa after the dust settles on the criminal and civil suits. I don't think the grandmother and the toddler's parents will be able to accept him/the sight of him once they no longer need to pretend they are one team against Royal Caribbean.

So you haven’t watched the videos?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.reddit.com/r/insaneparents/comments/er0jyt/i_dont_even_know_what_the_hell_he_thought_he_was/

Video 'proves' grandfather dangled toddler out of Royal Caribbean window for THIRTY SECONDS before fatally dropping her, cruise line says

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7903215/Video-grandfather-dangled-toddler-Royal-Caribbean-window-THIRTY-SECONDS.html

Actually, it was 34 seconds. That's a long time dangling a child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.reddit.com/r/insaneparents/comments/er0jyt/i_dont_even_know_what_the_hell_he_thought_he_was/

Video 'proves' grandfather dangled toddler out of Royal Caribbean window for THIRTY SECONDS before fatally dropping her, cruise line says

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7903215/Video-grandfather-dangled-toddler-Royal-Caribbean-window-THIRTY-SECONDS.html

I believe the grandfather didn’t realize or seriously underestimated the number of surveillance cameras. He lied believing that no one would be able to refute his story. Once they told him about the video, it was too late and became a situation of that’s the story and I am sticking to it.

This. He didn't know there were cameras so lied. There was no playroom; it was a bar. He didn't lift her up to bang on a window - he held the child, dangling, out of the window for 34 seconds and then let her go. Do none of you remember the grandmother who threw the toddler from the Tysons I pedestrian walkway from garage to the theater level? https://www.foxnews.com/us/grandmother-who-threw-granddaughter-off-mall-walkway-gets-35-years. Evil happens. And this family knew exactly what they were dealing with. Mom is a prosecutor or ex prosecutor. Dad is police office. They thought they could lie about the play area and protect grandpa with his stupid stories about color blindness. Or they thought they could piggyback off the Disney alligator-eats-child story. Whatever happened, the story does not add up and I hope the judge slams them and their lawyer with sanctions.