Forum Index
»
Off-Topic
The lawsuit against Royal Caribbean/toddler death
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/post-tribune/ct-nw-royal-caribbean-cruise-ship-death-chloe-wiegand-20200123-2nmrsz3pnvbgjoi5ge7zmd3pqe-story.html%3foutputType=amp
This showed up in google news. Family is saying RC lied about whether the grandfather could have leaned out the window. I’ve never been on a cruise ship like this before, so I have no idea, but seems like they’re not giving up. Seems like RC has a lot to lose, so the fact they’re fighting it indicates they think they could win (note I didn’t say they’re right because I don’t know.) Family says there’s 13 cameras and they want footage from all of them released. |
Anonymous
This all came out 6 days ago. The family has nothing to lose. Their child is dead, public opinion is against them, all they have left is to hope some poor judge falls for their lame lawsuit and gives them money. And if it doesn't work out, they are no worse off. RCI has made it clear they are not paying (and I support that.) |
Anonymous
|
The family has filed a frivolous lawsuit and abound be held accountable.
The mother is an attorney. The video shows with 100 percent certainty the grand father knew the window was open. He leaned out a couple of times. |
Anonymous
he family’s contention is RC chose the two camera angles that favor them to release and that the other 11 cameras show a different view that would support their claims. Maybe RC should release the other 11 views and prove the family wrong. |
Anonymous
Maybe (probably) RCI pocked the best two angles. But there is NO footage they could show me to convince me grandpa isn’t at fault and a complete moron. The family has lost in the court of public opinion. This is definitely not a case of “it could have happened to anyone.” No, it really really couldn’t. |
Anonymous
How would that really help them? All it takes is one camera angle to show the truth. There’s no disputing his head was out the window even if it wasn’t visible in the 11 other angles. It’s like when the police look at any picture/video. They look at all angles and they zoom in. So in 11 angles you can’t tell he’s leaning out, but in 2 it’s indisputable that he is. The more these people fight this and dig in the more they prove they are just despicable money grubbing terrible people. |
Anonymous
| I don’t understand the logic here — according to their attorney, it was too far for the step-grandpa to lean out the window without being off the ground by 7 inches...yet the baby could still fall out true window? |
Anonymous
| The family is just making themselves look to be bigger and bigger POS. They need to give it up. Their child is dead because of the idiot grandfather. The videos that were released make it so obvious. They are grainy as F but you can STILL see him CLEAR AS DAY, lean out the window himself and then lift her up. He 1000000000000% knew the window was open. They need to give it up. They are out for a pay day instead of mourning their deAd child and it’s disgusting. |
Anonymous
|
I think they're pushing it hard to get the settlement before the grandfather is finding guilty in Puerto Rico's criminal court.
|
Anonymous
I honestly don’t know it’s totally about a pay day. I think it’s more about being validated and confirming in an objective court of law that the blame lies with RC rather than the grandfather. If RC is at fault then they can blame them for their loss instead of their relative. I’m not saying the grandfather isn’t at fault—I’m putting myself in their shoes and I can’t imagine the pain of losing a child and having to reconcile that my relative was at fault. It’s much easier to blame, hate and vilify the company rather than the grandfather (from their perspective). |
Anonymous
Do you really think the parents' lawyer has much credibility at this point? First he was claiming it was "a children's play area". Didn't mention that the adult male picked her up and held her out. Yeah, there were probably 11 other cameras in the vicinity, but they aren't all focused on the bar/window area! They are surely focussed on the splash pad that was in the middle of the ship, or the other side of the ship, etc. Lawyer is just trying to sew doubt again -- I get the feeling that is his M.O. |
Anonymous
Which just goes to show that the male relative (51 yr old Anello), is not a tall man. When he held that child up to stand on the railing, he was surely holding on to her lower body.... and he did not have control of her center of gravity (head/torso).... allowing her weight to fall forward and out of his grasp. The average 18 mon old is 32 inches tall. (Let's say she is a little short for her age -- so we'll say she's 30 in). We know that the railing was at least 42 inches high. If you set a 30 in child standing up on a railing that is 42 inches high -- that means her head was 72 inches off the ground (which is 6 feet). Mr. Anello does not appear to be 6 feet tall. Think about the logistics of her standing body and where it was in comparison to Anello's height. |
Anonymous
| Anello is an idiot and should be locked up |
Anonymous
Colorblind, elderly AND short! This could happen to anyone! /s |
Anonymous
|
He's not "elderly!" He's 51! He's overweight and possibly obese, but he's not "elderly."
I suspect we'll find out that his supposed "color blindness" is a new discovery ( like "less distinction in determining color" but not actual color blindness. ) The parents' lawyer likes to play fast and loose with facts. |