maggie cruises

As others have said, and as a new cruiser to RCI rightfully told you, the rules with RCI is two bottles - 750 ml - of wine per stateroom. Doesn´t matter how many people are booked in the room, as long as one person in the room is of legal drinking age. It´s very clear cut and there´s no discussion about this being the official cruiseline rule.

 

 

 

Now if you are looking at ways around the official rules and what people might or might not get away with you can listen to those foks who try to tell you otherwise;)

No im not looking for ways around it but some posters were not clear. Some said 2 per cabin others said 2 per adult...thus 4 adults over 21 in same cabin according to some of the posters means 8 per cabin

I know now it's 2 per cabin brought on by the adults

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Only if one knows the context and realistic expectations.

Just using general common sense....and looking at all possibilities regarding this incident

Sent from my iPad using Forums

This is awesome.

Yes using logic and common sense usually is and I will reiterate yet again for those that don't read links or entire threads....

At 2am security should be stepped up not down

For those that defend not monitoring cameras...they should be monitored at times known for rowdy behavior at the minimum

We know nothing about the parents so to blame them is ridiculous as they may have put the kid to bed...perhaps right in the same cabin with them and he may have sneaked out or was lured out and they just didn't hear him or wake up

The library is apparently in a well traveled area according to posters here and doesn't have a door that can be locked and rccl apparently expects night owls to be there at 2am but doesn't monitor it even though it has cameras there...interesting

The judge is wrong by allowing the lawsuit to proceed because apparently there is no reason to hold rccl liable even though the attack took place in a well traveled area at 2am and didn't notice a kid out at 2am

However..kudos...to the ship for watching the video after the fact and getting the culprits....and even perhaps...apprehending them within minutes of the attack....but we don't know when they were apprehended...because that's not in the article so it could have been weeks later as well.

Oh and yes...this is a money grab by the parents

As opposed to..

Recognizing that legitimate lawsuits are a way to hold corporations

Responsible for their..policies...procedures...actions...that in the eyes of the law and judges and juries are detrimental to those that do business or are in some way hurt by said company

Also apparently a 13 yo is considered to actually understand everything at that age and should be expected to conduct himself as an adult and should be held responsible ..again no....the kid is protected by law as the law recognizes his age is a factor. I am not talking about trying a kid as an adult for certain crimes either as I get that concept I'm talking about trying to say they kid should,d have known better than to be out at 2am

Also we haven't a clue what the kid said to the girl. It could have just been taken the wrong way by the girl and her sick father or it could have been a serious nasty insult. The point is that they were just WORDS...not physical harm...but no one had enough sense to just ignore it

Enjoy your day all

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Still incorrect. Please try again.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Nope the judge is allowing the lawsuit to proceed. Not incorrect

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Not suggested, it's a fact.

 

Oasis Library has a door. But why lock it, someone might be a night owl and wants to read and not disturb cabin mate

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Someone might want to climb the rock wall at 2am also so why can't they?

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Indy has 7 passenger decks, several of which have interior corridors. She has 4 elevator banks covering 14 decks. And these are public decks. There are several non public decks.

 

She also has several stairwells that can't be locked because they are fire escapes.

 

Concierge lounge and Diamond lounge are open 24/7. Now they have locks, but bad people might have the key.

 

Used to be card rooms that are open all night

 

Get the picture yet?

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Yup big ship with lots of nooks and crannies

Lots of pax too

Lots of staff too

Are you suggesting because it so intricate layout wise that monitoring these areas isn't possible or that the ship shouldn't do it because it's too cumbersome. Really?

That's like saying that chaperones shouldn't be required to count the 4th graders heads on the bus because it's too difficult and there are so many of them

Solution...you take more chaperones

Ship solution...you step up security at 2am when it's known that trouble occurs in the late hours.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Not private.

 

 

 

Do you know the difference between logic and emotion?

It was private at the time of the attack and my posts are based in logic but let's face it everyone just wants to believe what they want and refuses to think stuff through rationally these days.

However my opinion is simple....I'm asking why would any pax even be able to corner a 13 yo at 2am in a room that admittedly has a security camera that logic tells me has a door in it and is not an open area

Library should have been locked.

If the library isn't remote as has been suggested that's even worse

Sent from my iPad using Forums

That's actually dangerous in my book.

 

You could fall in and get tangled.

 

That could be a lot more common than this assault

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

But the ship does it anyway and they usually have crew stationed in the pool deck 24/7 too

So rccl does know it's vulnerable areas

Sorry but I'm not wavering ...they should recognize that an unlocked room such as they library at 2am is vulnerable and should have been locked

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Ignorant in that you can't understand the library is the passageway between elevator banks on a cabin deck

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Cabin decks should be monitored

Elevator decks should be monitored

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Have you been on a Voyager or Freedom ship?

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Doesn't matter as I've been in numerous ships. It was a room that an accomplice was able to stand by the door in order to watch for pax. The perp had a private room to attack the boy. However if you are implying on this class of ship that the library is in a well traveled area then all the more reason to monitor it.

The argument will always go back to this....there was an unmonitored area at 2am which is a known time for incidents to happen and this is true on all ships all lines so rccl should have stepped up security at this time.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Omg the judge doesn't "verify who should or shouldn't be sued". That's not how it works. A judge decides if motions are valid or not based on law and precedent. All the judge said by not dismissing it is that either law or precedent doesn't agree with their motion to dismiss. (And someone might know legalese better than me) A judge not agreeing with a motion to dismiss does not give the lawsuit any more validity than it had before, it just means he doesn't have the power to dismiss it offhand.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Ok then...how about this...the judge decided the motion was valid.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

maggie, I hate to do this because your posts are extremely entertaining, but please stop the ignorant bs, it is an embarrassment.

Nope what's an embarrassment is that so many here think rccl didn't need to monitor their cameras

Or

That the parents are at fault

Or

That rccl shouldn't be more cognizant as to the happenings in the ship at 2am

I guess I'm ignorant to suggest the library be locked at 2am?

Tell me why do they put rope netting over the pools? Why do they do that I wonder?

Sent from my iPad using Forums

It is neither remote or unused.

 

Where did you get that from

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Doubtful it's used at 2am

Remote in that it's usually not located in the atrium

However your post actually reinforces the need for it to be monitored

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Yes he was, but the perpatrator was not RCCL. And what difference does liquor make? These "gentlemen" could have been just as abussive sober as drunk. It was their moral character that was at fault. And they should suffer the most extreme penalty. And just how easy do you think it is to determine just how drunk someone is? In many cases, it is extremely hard to detect...or do you think the bartenders should employ breathalizers.

 

A little levity on both sides of this issue would be nice. BTW, what does the cruise contract say about it?

Omg the point is there was video in place that the ship should have monitored but didn't ...especially since this was a remote unused area of the ship!!!

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Question: How many of you will never cruise on RCL again because this happened? I hear a lot of outrage. But how outraged are you really?

Not really an issue for me and mine as we are in bed before midnight as we prefer to wake up early to enjoy the ports and my young adult kids stick together and have no need to ever speak or get to know anyone in the ship. We do family stuff.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

This is the classic legal situation of going after deep pockets if you can try and come up with any reason to drag them into the case. Part of the main drivers for doing so is because most companies will settle rather than going to court. So there is a big drive to bring the suit.

 

The perpetrators are responsible, but the ability of getting any large sum of money is very limited. So you go after anyone you can find that has lots of money (deep pockets) and sue them, even if they are really not responsible, all you need is a jury you can convince. This is a case that will not be decided on its merits. It will be won or lost in jury selection. The attorney bringing the case will try and get people of the jury that don't like large corporations or that will be swayed by the age of the victim.

 

Lets say you lived in a gated community, with an HOA of 3000. If the attack occurred there by an irate parent at 1am that caught the kid walking around the streets, would those of you that think Royal is culpable think that the HOA should be sued as well? After all they are responsible for the community.

Most people know that you need to initially sue any and all that could be liable...then the judge certifies who should or shouldn't be sued. You need to do this so as to be sure all possible defendants are considered.

The judge has already said rccl is the defendant that the plaintiff should be suing

Btw...posters will imply that means I'm saying rccl is guilty...nope...I'm saying the judge is saying if anyone can be held responsible...rccl might be the one

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Same could be said for the punk who tried to rape the teenage girl

And you read this where? I read he made an inappropriate comment.

Please link your source

Sent from my iPad using Forums

There's what, at least 10 elevators per ship if you include crew elevators. Add in at least 2 elevator landings per floor, so 30 landings, plus stairs. You're easily talking 75 cameras before you even talk corridors which I would think at minimum would add another 100+ cameras. So how many people and space would it take to monitor 200 cameras that cover the corridors and elevators/stairs?

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Those are the places that need monitoring ftlog. Someone falls on the steps. Someone is arguing or fighting in the corridors.

The atrium doesn't need the monitors...the remote areas do.

Again a simple solution...lock the unused areas so you don't need to monitor them...but the simple fact that there is a camera says rccl felt the library needed monitoring so why didn't they do it...or why didn't they lock it

Sent from my iPad using Forums

What services on the cruise ship are you willing to give up to staff that function? How much more are you willing to pay in your fare? The number of crew quarters is finite. If you add new ones you need to subtract others. Which cameras should they be actively monitoring? There are hundreds on the ship. Should they monitor them all. To cover them in any kind of reasonable fashion you would need a relatively large staff, similar to that in the security control area in a casino. That doesn't even get into labor for patrol.

 

 

 

Cruise ships are statistically safer than most towns of similar size.

Simple...get a key and lock ...the library and all other unneeded areas at 2am....which would include any remotely located area that someone could get into...but has no reason to be there at 2am

The ice skating rink comes to mind too

Sent from my iPad using Forums

It's not going to happen. Impossible to watch 300 cameras live 24/7, imagine the manpower required for that and increase security. You can't watch every hall, room, venue on the ship... Also no comparison to cruise ship/hotel and New York which happens to be World Wide target #1 for over 25 years ...

But you either lock off certain areas like the library that are vulnerable at 2am or you put your manpower watching those vulnerable areas if you can't figure out they should be locked.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

In the ARTICLE (NBC 6) that someone posted earlier, the mom is quoted as saying the two boys "decided that they would want to stay out a bit later." So she knew and were ok with them being out and about. Maybe she expected them to be back before curfew and they just didn't listen to her, but she should still hold some responsibility.

 

 

 

I don't see how the cruise is responsible for the victim being out after curfew unless it can be proven that they saw the boys and blatantly ignored them.

Well I disagree about the ship not being responsible about the curfew. The victim had to walk down a corridor or take an elevator or something to get to the library. Those areas should have been monitored as well. I've never seen a library next to a cabin either. So he had to either get there somehow...or...and this hasn't been mentioned yet....lured there somehow

Why isn't anyone questioning why he would be there in the 1st place?

My take....

He was forced in there by the father and friend which makes it ever scarier that 2 men to get a 13 yo into the library without being noticed ....did they teleport themselves? Nope they walked across decks ...up or down stairs...plus they had to find the kid first. Very unsettling.

Just think it through...why would he go to the library on his own? Ever.

He was lured imho either by the father or perhaps the daughter....remember we don't know what he said to her....but my mind runs the gamut of the possibilities.

Imho everyone involved is a punk and fortunately the father and friend have been jailed...but the kid...probably a real winner anyway....is still a victim.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

To many cameras.

 

Can you prioritize which ones?

 

Pools/hot tubs

Outside Promenade

Hallways

Bars

Casino

Solarium

Helipad

Theater

Library (maybe a reason to remove them)

Internet Cafe

 

I know I can't

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Actually at 2am the most remote spots in the ship are the ones that need the most surveillance

The casino needs cameras to stop cheaters but certainly not to stop an assault in a crowded casino

The library door should have been locked at 2am. No need for a closed in room to be open. It's a perfect spot for attack and the ship should recognize this. They shut down pools water slides etc at night at some published time don't they? Why is that I wonder? Oh yes to keep people safe

They put up wet floor signs

They rope off entrance to the open promenade decks during high winds. Again why is that? Oh yes...a safety precaution

The library should have set hours and then locked. No need for access to the library at 2am especially since they don't want to monitor its security cameras.

Bottom line is remote areas of the ship need the most surveillance

Either lock them or watch them.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Yeah who needs a silly old trial? :D

Settling this will cost rccl much less than a verdict especially if proven that cameras weren't manned

However rccl didn't enforce their curfew either. So strike 2

A 13yo was the victim no matter which way anyone tries to change it. You absolutely cannot blame the victim of an assault.

Also...since I'm a logical thinker...until it's proven the parents allowed him out and about at 2am...he could have well left the cabin with them thinking he was asleep.

McDonald's probably wishes they had settled too The woman only wanted her medical bills paid...I can't stress that enough because I know so many people still believe she was trying to get a big payout.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

I'm not defending the cruise line. Go back and read my posts in this thread. In fact, in my first post in the thread, I suggested that the cruise line might be at fault.

 

 

 

I never said anything about needing or not needing increased security. I never even thought about that until you mentioned it.

 

 

 

And once again, the article states that the cameras weren't monitored because the article was citing what's in the lawsuit.

So the plaintiffs lawyers are making it up that the cameras weren't monitored?

My take is this....the plaintiff lawyers took their time putting together this lawsuit....sent out their investigators...and those investigators found evidence the cameras weren't monitored

Of course I'm not an idiot....and realize there is a lot of fake stuff out there....but the debate here is based on what this particular article says and it says they weren't monitored and that may well be true

Rccl is wrong as stated by other posters

Curfew

Alcohol

Cameras

Plaintiff will win

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Sorry but I think the cruise lines’ first order of business is the safety of all of its guests. Period. Of course they are responsible for my safety and the safety of every single person on board.

 

To me it seems like RC is responsible on three points. One, served too much alcohol (no shock there), two not monitoring their security cameras, and three not enforcing the curfew.

 

Their security should be there to prevent dangerous situations, not just react to them. I mean why even have security on board if all they are going to do is to react to situations after the fact?

 

I hope RC gets nailed to the wall on this one.

Very well said. Also very true.

Sent from my iPad using Forums