Oasis Lawyer

[chadbeck]

They'll have plenty of video to figure out exactly what happened. If you ever just look up on the ship cameras are all over. They have them all down the hallways/bars/elevators/stairs if something started there and also all down the sides of the ship so they can see all of the balconies. Cameras are also placed all along deck where the lifeboats are. Its not going to be hard to get to the bottom of this.

[graphicguy]

Just read this reported today at CBS Miami.....

 

Follow CBSMIAMI.COM: Facebook | Twitter

 

MIAMI (CBSMiami) – A man who fell to his death while onboard Royal Caribbean’s “Oasis of the Seas” ship intentionally jumped off a balcony, according to the Broward Sheriff’s Office.

 

Bernardo and Eric Elbaz, who live in New York and have been married for about a year, had booked the cruise on the Oasis of the Seas to celebrate Eric’s 34th birthday.

 

Originally, Royal Caribbean said that crew members saw Bernardo Elbaz, 35, “intentionally going over the side of the ship” on November 6th around 1 a.m. Friday morning while the ship was about 17 miles from the Turks and Caicos.

 

“Our onboard security team responded to the guest’s stateroom after a neighboring guest complained about a domestic dispute on the guest’s balcony,” according to a second statement from the cruise line. “Our staff did not have a physical altercation with the guest and were unable to prevent his jumping from the stateroom balcony.”

 

Broward sheriff’s investigators say when the ship’s security went to the couple’s cabin regarding a domestic disturbance they found evidence of a physical altercation.

 

On cell phone video reviewed by detectives, Bernardo Elbaz can be heard declaring that he was planning to jump overboard. In the recording, he can be seen running towards the balcony alone. The video also shows Erick Elbaz running after him followed by the ship’s security staff.

 

Sheriff’s investigators said Bernardo Elbaz jumped down from his seventh floor balcony and struck the metal support for a lifeboat on the fifth floor. He clung to the ship as staff members tried to rescue him. He fell into the water moments later.

 

A dramatic video that was shot by a guest on their cell phone and put on social media, shows the final moments of Bernardo Elbaz’s life. He’s seen dangling off the side of a life boat davit as a crew member attempts to pull him to safety.

 

Elbaz then appears to lose his grip and falls to his death in the churning sea elow.

 

Mike Winkleman, an attorney for the Elbaz family, said he can’t believe that Bernardo really wanted to take his own life.

 

“It’s very clear in the video that he’s trying to hang on, this is very clearly someone who is not trying to commit suicide,” said Winkleman.

 

In a statement Monday, Royal Caribbean stood by their previous statements.

 

“We are aware that the facts we have provided differ from the attorney’s remarks, but we stand behind the information in our statements.

 

Our ship’s security officers responded to reports of domestic dispute loud enough to be heard from several staterooms away. The room was in a state of disarray, and both lamps in the room had been broken. Our officers interviewed the guests separately about their dispute, as is standard procedure. The officers were not in the room when the guest chose to jump off his balcony.

 

Our officers responded professionally and appropriately to the incident in the stateroom. In addition, other security officers and crew risked their own lives in an attempt to rescue the guest from the lifeboat rigging where he had fallen.”

 

Winkleman said it was Royal Caribbean crew members who instigated the situation that led to Elbaz’s death.

 

Personally, I'm not liking this lawyer so much. A man states he's going to jump overboard, yet the lawyer can't believe he actually did it? He also insinuates that the crew somehow made him jump overboard? Really? That's just ridiculous!

[Palmetto Pilot]

Good for Royal to stick to their guns.

[LuckiStac13*Majesty*]

I am at a loss on how anyone can say this is Royal Caribbean's fault.

 

It's really very simple, as long as the video shows the man going over the side intentionally, no matter what the reason or previous circumstances that led to it.

[ATC cruiser]

Mike Winkleman, an attorney for the Elbaz family, said he can’t believe that Bernardo really wanted to take his own life.

 

That's right, because then he (the lawyer) wouldn't be able to collect any money.

[LuckiStac13*Majesty*]

Mike Winkleman, an attorney for the Elbaz family, said he can’t believe that Bernardo really wanted to take his own life.

 

That's right, because then he (the lawyer) wouldn't be able to collect any money.

 

Exactly. I can't believe these lawyers. Sickening.

[A&L_Ont]

Locking codes work for the common population. A knowledgeable person can extract all of the info on a phone very easily.

 

Which is perfect. I have no reason to believe that ship security would fool with the guest's phones to view,delete etc anything on it.

 

I might also add RC can't run a web-site effectively so I doubt they would be able to unlock a cell phone. ;)

[Big Beer Gut]

Well actually- from Royal Caribbean:

 

In January 2006, we introduced a comprehensive SafeServe training program for all of our shipboard bartenders and servers. The program, which was developed by the Educational Foundation of the National Restaurant Association, teaches our staff how to serve alcohol responsibly. Our bartenders and servers are required to participate in this training and successfully pass a test.

 

As part of this program, our bartenders and servers are trained to recognize over consumption, and once recognized, to deny additional alcoholic beverages, serve additional water or non-alcoholic drinks, and/or provide food. And while the bartenders and servers on our ships work for tips, just like those in shoreside bars and restaurants, we have strict policies designed to prevent over serving. It is unacceptable and forbidden for any crew member to knowingly serve any intoxicated guest. If we become aware of any employee violating our policies, we take disciplinary action.

 

Based on all of the reports it seems clear that RCL did not follow their own policy. This will be the basis for the suit and the reason that RCL will settle this one out of court.

[Tura Lura]

Based on all of the reports it seems clear that RCL did not follow their own policy. This will be the basis for the suit and the reason that RCL will settle this one out of court.

 

Agreed. I think they will settle out of court and then do a review of internal policies. I work at a mega corporation, that's what generally happens.

[A&L_Ont]

Based on all of the reports it seems clear that RCL did not follow their own policy. This will be the basis for the suit and the reason that RCL will settle this one out of court.

 

Has it been reported that the either of the gentlemen were drunk? I have read that one was at the bar, but just because you went to the bar it does not mean you were drunk. Domestic disputes don't always involve drunk people.

 

Seriously, I am just asking.

[garnetpalmetto]

Agreed. I think they will settle out of court and then do a review of internal policies. I work at a mega corporation, that's what generally happens.

 

Pretty much this. I've been on both sides of the fence - plaintiff's personal injury/workers' comp and defense/in-house counsel and it wouldn't surprise me if, after a few rounds of discovery, RCI and plaintiff's counsel entered into some settlement negotiations. Elbaz gets some cash for loss of consortium in return for a non-disparagement agreement, RCI gets controlled costs and does an internal review, and that's that.

[birdlord]

Has it been reported that the either of the gentlemen were drunk? I have read that one was at the bar, but just because you went to the bar it does not mean you were drunk. Domestic disputes don't always involve drunk people.

 

Seriously, I am just asking.

 

I think more than one witness accused both men to have been drinking heavily. I saw an interview on ABC National news on Friday evening where the witness indicated just that. But, unless the body is found an a BAC test administered, there'd be no real way to know except for witness testimony.

[chengkp75]

Based on all of the reports it seems clear that RCL did not follow their own policy. This will be the basis for the suit and the reason that RCL will settle this one out of court.

 

I don't quite see it that way. The only time inebriation is mentioned is by the plaintiff's lawyer. No where does RCI state that the person was inebriated. Further, who's to say that the "altercation" that supposedly started the whole thing was not over this person being cut off. How many inebriated people have you seen that quietly submit to being cut off, and being told they'd had too much. There is no proof that RCI did not follow their own procedures.

 

The Broward Sherriff's account of what is on the couple's cell phones is particularly damning to their case, if they actually heard the victim saying he was going to jump.

 

Plaintiff's lawyer says that because the man was seen to be hanging on, it indicates that he really didn't want to take his own life. This is called hesitation remorse, and the adrenaline rush from striking the davit would have made him want to live, but his original intent was to jump.

 

I just don't see any grounds for this, except that the lawyer is calling it a flawed search and rescue. That will be hard to defend as well, once the bridge voice and data recorders are reviewed.

[Krazykitty323]

Pretty much this. I've been on both sides of the fence - plaintiff's personal injury/workers' comp and defense/in-house counsel and it wouldn't surprise me if, after a few rounds of discovery, RCI and plaintiff's counsel entered into some settlement negotiations. Elbaz gets some cash for loss of consortium in return for a non-disparagement agreement, RCI gets controlled costs and does an internal review, and that's that.

 

 

That's horrible that someone can profit from someone else's death which was a suicide. Both the attorney and the husband should be ashamed of themselves.

[pseudoware]

If anyone's starting a pool on when this thread will be closed put me down for 10am.

And less than a day for another one to be started (like this one).

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[chengkp75]

I think more than one witness accused both men to have been drinking heavily. I saw an interview on ABC National news on Friday evening where the witness indicated just that. But, unless the body is found an a BAC test administered, there'd be no real way to know except for witness testimony.

 

Long, long, way from drinking heavily and being intoxicated. Especially when the witnesses are the lay public, with no field sobriety training.

[LMaxwell]

I don't quite see it that way. The only time inebriation is mentioned is by the plaintiff's lawyer. No where does RCI state that the person was inebriated. Further, who's to say that the "altercation" that supposedly started the whole thing was not over this person being cut off. How many inebriated people have you seen that quietly submit to being cut off, and being told they'd had too much. There is no proof that RCI did not follow their own procedures.

 

The Broward Sherriff's account of what is on the couple's cell phones is particularly damning to their case, if they actually heard the victim saying he was going to jump.

 

Plaintiff's lawyer says that because the man was seen to be hanging on, it indicates that he really didn't want to take his own life. This is called hesitation remorse, and the adrenaline rush from striking the davit would have made him want to live, but his original intent was to jump.

 

I just don't see any grounds for this, except that the lawyer is calling it a flawed search and rescue. That will be hard to defend as well, once the bridge voice and data recorders are reviewed.

 

Good analysis and insightful; as to whether the victim was inebriated, wouldn't RCI at least have the SeaPass records and know what was charged, how often, etc.?

[ryano]

Pretty much this. I've been on both sides of the fence - plaintiff's personal injury/workers' comp and defense/in-house counsel and it wouldn't surprise me if, after a few rounds of discovery, RCI and plaintiff's counsel entered into some settlement negotiations. Elbaz gets some cash for loss of consortium in return for a non-disparagement agreement, RCI gets controlled costs and does an internal review, and that's that.

 

Which is absolutely disgusting to me :mad: And that cost will be passed right along to us as well. You can believe that!

 

I expect many people will be cut off from drinking, drink packages may now come with a limit and all kinds of stuff happening if thats the way it pans out.

 

Someone can correct me if Im wrong but the above policy was written shortly after George Smith disappeared off of Brilliance. Along that same time I believe allowing bottles of liquor to be purchased was axed too. We will all feel this in some kind of way.

 

I dont see how these disgusting ambulance chasing attorneys sleep at night! :mad:

Edited November 9, 2015 by ryano

[graphicguy]

Yeah...tough to prove servers were serving this guy knowing he was inebriated. Again, going from bar to bar, server to server, it would be next to impossible to say either man was drunk without a toxicology report. They may have been acting pretty crazy (and the accounts I've read support that). That doesn't mean they were necessarily drunk, or that someone knowingly "overserved" them.

 

Again, this sounds more like the lawyer grabbing at straws, and trying to do little more than shakedown the cruise line.

[chengkp75]

Good analysis and insightful; as to whether the victim was inebriated, wouldn't RCI at least have the SeaPass records and know what was charged, how often, etc.?

 

Yes, but as we all know, alcohol "capacity" is dependent on the individual. With RCI's policy of training bar staff to be cognizant of intoxication, and the security staff's training (they administer the random alcohol testing to the crew), I think this would go a lot further than lay witnesses without any training.

[Krazykitty323]

Which is absolutely disgusting to me :mad: And that cost will be passed right along to us as well. You can believe that!

 

I expect many people will be cut off from drinking, drink packages may now come with a limit and all kinds of stuff happening if thats the way it pans out.

 

Someone can correct me if Im wrong but the above policy was written shortly after George Smith disappeared off of Brilliance. Along that same time I believe allowing bottles of liquor to be purchased was axed too. We will all feel this in some kind of way.

 

I dont see how these disgusting ambulance chasing attorneys sleep at night! :mad:

 

 

 

I agree.. We all have to suffer for someone else's stupidity

[birdlord]

Long, long, way from drinking heavily and being intoxicated. Especially when the witnesses are the lay public, with no field sobriety training.

 

True. I do believe the man I saw being interviewed did use the word "inebriated" but he was in no way, I suspect, an expert witness in the field.

[Bellfree Bat]

Is it possible we could have just one thread on this topic stay civil with actual information?

 

Off topic but we live in the same town... :p

[Kesali]

I agree the video audio clearly says "don't let him jump"..

 

SunkissedMommy - thank you for the balcony photo!! We have 2 balconies booked (1st cruise) with the intention of putting the kids in the adjoining one and us in the other. But the past couple of nights I close my eyes at night and start worrying and thinking we should stick to dad/son and mom/daughter rooms. It's reassuring to see just how high that balcony is!

Edited November 9, 2015 by Kesali

[garnetpalmetto]

Which is absolutely disgusting to me :mad: And that cost will be passed right along to us as well. You can believe that!

 

I expect many people will be cut off from drinking, drink packages may now come with a limit and all kinds of stuff happening if thats the way it pans out.

 

Someone can correct me if Im wrong but the above policy was written shortly after George Smith disappeared off of Brilliance. Along that same time I believe allowing bottles of liquor to be purchased was axed too. We will all feel this in some kind of way.

 

I dont see how these disgusting ambulance chasing attorneys sleep at night! :mad:

 

I agree.. We all have to suffer for someone else's stupidity

 

Easy there. No need to go overboard. Each year companies budget for legal fees, including settlements. The odds of "cost being passed along" is fairly unlikely. Likewise, talk of drink packages coming with limits are also unlikely. You do an internal review, implement new training for bar staff and that's all that'll likely happen.

 

As for the vitriol against "disgusting" attorneys, people tend to say that sort of thing right up until the point where they need one. Yes, as someone who works in the legal field there are some complete dirtbag attorneys out there. Just as there are complete dirtbag doctors, teachers, police officers, athletes, etc. The majority of plaintiff's PI attorneys I've come across are just zealously advocating for their client and, in most cases, are the only person out there advocating for their client and understand that unless they take a case that has some chance of success, they wind up with nothing. Such is the peril of the contingency fee-based structure plaintiff's attorneys must operate under. Like most large companies, RCI has a fleet of in-house attorneys and outside counsel on retainer who get paid win or lose. They'll zealously advocate for their client as well and somewhere in the middle a compromise will be reached.