The lawsuit against Royal Caribbean/toddler death

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am still baffled by the reaction of the parents to circle so strongly around a man, who, in fact, killed their baby. He married the grandmother in recent years and was not a part of raising the mom. Why cleave to him so strongly and immediately? The ship staff separated them as a matter of course right after the event, some parents might have physically or at least verbally attacked someone who had just dropped their baby 11 stories onto concrete. I just do not get it. The focus on CHLOE as the victim has become step-grandfather/baby killer as the victim and it seems to erase her.

Yes, this is incredibly bizarre.

I find their reaction incredibly strange, too. If anyone, even my own mother whom I know adores my kids beyond a shadow of a doubt, dropped my baby out a window like that I doubt that I would be able to rush to defend her, simply because that is something that You.Do.Not.Do. Ever.

What this man did is simply unfathomable and completely indefensible.

Maybe he’s Grandma’s Mr. Wonderful and Grandma has money? This happened in two families I knew. The children and grandchildren all tolerated everything the new stepdad did because the mom would have cut them out of her will otherwise. It was gross to watch.

He killed their baby by dropping her out of an 11 story window. The parents seem to be hellbent on getting money out of RC while giving Grandpa a complete pass on his own deliberate, willful actions. I don't pretend to understand their logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am still baffled by the reaction of the parents to circle so strongly around a man, who, in fact, killed their baby. He married the grandmother in recent years and was not a part of raising the mom. Why cleave to him so strongly and immediately? The ship staff separated them as a matter of course right after the event, some parents might have physically or at least verbally attacked someone who had just dropped their baby 11 stories onto concrete. I just do not get it. The focus on CHLOE as the victim has become step-grandfather/baby killer as the victim and it seems to erase her.

Because IF Sam Anello is at fault, then Royal Carribbean is not. If Royal Caribbean is not at fault, then Royal Caribbean does not pay millions of dollars to them.

Parents want money... therefore Sam is not at fault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am still baffled by the reaction of the parents to circle so strongly around a man, who, in fact, killed their baby. He married the grandmother in recent years and was not a part of raising the mom. Why cleave to him so strongly and immediately? The ship staff separated them as a matter of course right after the event, some parents might have physically or at least verbally attacked someone who had just dropped their baby 11 stories onto concrete. I just do not get it. The focus on CHLOE as the victim has become step-grandfather/baby killer as the victim and it seems to erase her.

Because IF Sam Anello is at fault, then Royal Carribbean is not. If Royal Caribbean is not at fault, then Royal Caribbean does not pay millions of dollars to them.

Parents want money... therefore Sam is not at fault.

Bingo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The longer they maintain their lawsuit against the cruise line and defend the "elderly colorblind grandpa," the more I imagine this might have been intentional/planned....

Horrifying to contemplate but cannot be ruled out.

He has a slew of tickets for speeding and failure to wear a seatbelt, might be the type who does not like to feel infringed on by rules.

The staff initially said he was "playing games" and in the video you can see a woman rush away after witnessing him lift Chloe over the railing. Does not suggest it was safe behavior and a 1 in a million risk from the reactions of those who were there.

He looks at least a decade older than 51? Is there a substance issue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The longer they maintain their lawsuit against the cruise line and defend the "elderly colorblind grandpa," the more I imagine this might have been intentional/planned....

I came to this conclusion when Royal Caribbean put out their press release and the family responded a couple days later. They are in it for the money. period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The longer they maintain their lawsuit against the cruise line and defend the "elderly colorblind grandpa," the more I imagine this might have been intentional/planned....

Horrifying to contemplate but cannot be ruled out.

He has a slew of tickets for speeding and failure to wear a seatbelt, might be the type who does not like to feel infringed on by rules.

The staff initially said he was "playing games" and in the video you can see a woman rush away after witnessing him lift Chloe over the railing. Does not suggest it was safe behavior and a 1 in a million risk from the reactions of those who were there.

He looks at least a decade older than 51? Is there a substance issue?

Wow, I didn't notice that! That's very telling. She knew something bad was going to happen and didn't want to be around to witness it. That poor baby! i really wonder how much time grandpa spent with the baby and if other people have seen him doing unsafe things before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am still baffled by the reaction of the parents to circle so strongly around a man, who, in fact, killed their baby. He married the grandmother in recent years and was not a part of raising the mom. Why cleave to him so strongly and immediately? The ship staff separated them as a matter of course right after the event, some parents might have physically or at least verbally attacked someone who had just dropped their baby 11 stories onto concrete. I just do not get it. The focus on CHLOE as the victim has become step-grandfather/baby killer as the victim and it seems to erase her.

Yes, this is incredibly bizarre.

I find their reaction incredibly strange, too. If anyone, even my own mother whom I know adores my kids beyond a shadow of a doubt, dropped my baby out a window like that I doubt that I would be able to rush to defend her, simply because that is something that You.Do.Not.Do. Ever.

What this man did is simply unfathomable and completely indefensible.

Maybe he’s Grandma’s Mr. Wonderful and Grandma has money? This happened in two families I knew. The children and grandchildren all tolerated everything the new stepdad did because the mom would have cut them out of her will otherwise. It was gross to watch.

He killed their baby by dropping her out of an 11 story window. The parents seem to be hellbent on getting money out of RC while giving Grandpa a complete pass on his own deliberate, willful actions. I don't pretend to understand their logic.

Good point about the grandmother, PP! She must have paid for the trip, hence the grandparents are along on the trip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am still baffled by the reaction of the parents to circle so strongly around a man, who, in fact, killed their baby. He married the grandmother in recent years and was not a part of raising the mom. Why cleave to him so strongly and immediately? The ship staff separated them as a matter of course right after the event, some parents might have physically or at least verbally attacked someone who had just dropped their baby 11 stories onto concrete. I just do not get it. The focus on CHLOE as the victim has become step-grandfather/baby killer as the victim and it seems to erase her.

Yes, this is incredibly bizarre.

People do that when they know they are in the wrong - they stick together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am still baffled by the reaction of the parents to circle so strongly around a man, who, in fact, killed their baby. He married the grandmother in recent years and was not a part of raising the mom. Why cleave to him so strongly and immediately? The ship staff separated them as a matter of course right after the event, some parents might have physically or at least verbally attacked someone who had just dropped their baby 11 stories onto concrete. I just do not get it. The focus on CHLOE as the victim has become step-grandfather/baby killer as the victim and it seems to erase her.

Yes, this is incredibly bizarre.

People do that when they know they are in the wrong - they stick together.

Ah, this may be it, and of course big $ is at stake. As someone pointed out above, if Sam is at fault, deep pocked Royal Carribean is NOT, therefore...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am still baffled by the reaction of the parents to circle so strongly around a man, who, in fact, killed their baby. He married the grandmother in recent years and was not a part of raising the mom. Why cleave to him so strongly and immediately? The ship staff separated them as a matter of course right after the event, some parents might have physically or at least verbally attacked someone who had just dropped their baby 11 stories onto concrete. I just do not get it. The focus on CHLOE as the victim has become step-grandfather/baby killer as the victim and it seems to erase her.

Yes, this is incredibly bizarre.

People do that when they know they are in the wrong - they stick together.

Yes, I think this is what people do. Until they don't--and I don't think this can last forever.

This could be planned, and they're in it for the money. Horrible but possible. It could also be that for the moment, it's too difficult to accept that a family member did this (even through idiotic behavior), and rather than deal with reality, they're projecting their blame and pain onto the big bad wolf. But denial can last only so long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The longer they maintain their lawsuit against the cruise line and defend the "elderly colorblind grandpa," the more I imagine this might have been intentional/planned....

Horrifying to contemplate but cannot be ruled out.

He has a slew of tickets for speeding and failure to wear a seatbelt, might be the type who does not like to feel infringed on by rules.

The staff initially said he was "playing games" and in the video you can see a woman rush away after witnessing him lift Chloe over the railing. Does not suggest it was safe behavior and a 1 in a million risk from the reactions of those who were there.

He looks at least a decade older than 51? Is there a substance issue?

Wow, I didn't notice that! That's very telling. She knew something bad was going to happen and didn't want to be around to witness it. That poor baby! i really wonder how much time grandpa spent with the baby and if other people have seen him doing unsafe things before.

Was it the grandma running in the video?

[Anonymous]

Which video are you seeing a woman rushing away when he lifts Chloe over the railing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The family has asserted things that are patently untrue, such that the tragedy occurred in a children's play area. Photos show that is blatantly untrue, she fell or was dropped from a window next to a bar. The parents advised him not to take a breathalyzer. His actions were bizarre, booze cannot be ruled out, esp when you connect the dots. Perhaps prescription meds? It will all come out in the criminal and civil suits, I imagine. Ships track alcohol consumption and there were many witnesses.

If you are a parent who is super sensitive about alcohol due to anxiety about the care your kids get when you are drinking, please seek help. If you are anxious about leaving your kids in the care of impaired adults, heed those feelings and keep them safe.

The bolded is something you've literally made up and then come back to post over and over and over again. You are the one who needs to seek some help.

[Anonymous]

I saw on CNN that RC's motion to dismiss was denied, but that the judge is allowing RC to refile if their motion was limited to the 4 corners of the plaintiff's complaint. Is there a lawyer reading this thread that can shed some light on what this all means, if anything?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw on CNN that RC's motion to dismiss was denied, but that the judge is allowing RC to refile if their motion was limited to the 4 corners of the plaintiff's complaint. Is there a lawyer reading this thread that can shed some light on what this all means, if anything?

I haven’t read the order, but here’s what I suspect is going on, and it also tells you why the case is unlikely to be dismissed: the complaint is to be read as if all facts are true - at the motion to dismiss phase, you aren’t arguing on the evidence on the facts, it’s just if the facts as pled (written) in the complaint are true, has the plaintiff stated a claim (meaning - alleged the elements of a violation to support their cause of action). So, if they say x, y, z thing happened, does that show negligence on RC’s part. So they can’t say “he knew the window was open” as they did; they can say they plaintiffs haven’t alleged sufficient facts to show that they were negligent and that a reasonable person would not have held a baby out a window (because duh).

It’s actually unusual for a court to allow them to refile, so that’s telling. It’s also unusual however for a complaint to be dismissed outright without opportunity to refile for the plaintiffs, so even if they win, they probably will still be at it for a while as the judge gives the plaintiffs a chance to refile and cure the defects of their complaint.