Toddler Death Law Suit Update

[hazence]

4 minutes ago, madiaka said:

Because of this, I can’t imagine that they still want to see all of the videos. The phrase - be careful what you ask for, you just might get it - comes to mind. 

Excellent point.

[Bradison]

13 minutes ago, BSocial said:

so, was GF reaching her over wooden railing, to stand her on the aluminum/metal window sill, to get a better view?   She’d have been right at the opening then.   I can’t imagine anyone putting a child in such a dangerous position.   Horrible. 
 

we cruised on Freedom class last March with Extended family like theirs - grandparents, adult parents, 4 grandkids (10-13 years old).  Everyone had cruised before, and we still made a point to go over rules in the terminal waiting to board.   “No leaning over balcony or windows, no climbing on railings, no running or jumping down steps, etc.”. Common sense, and it was for the benefit of the grandkids, but the grandparents also heard the rules.    
 

If this family had done the same, then both sets of Grandparents would also have heard, and little Chloe would most likely still be with her family.  

 

Even if this was a static pane of glass and even if he only lifted her onto the wooden rail, this is still a highly dangerous maneuver.  Especially, if the goal is to "let her bang on the glass".

If he loses grip and she falls forward into the glass, she gets injured, no doubt.  I am a big proponent of the adage "take your medicine and own it".  It is a true testament of character to admit to the world you made a mistake.

[hazence]

When my grandchildren visit, I look at everything in our home with suspicion. The parents, my children, tease me that I should have had a career in risk management. But I know all my prep work for their safety doesn’t mean I haven’t missed something or that I might not have one awful moment where I turn my back or slip up.

 

Just a moment of stupidity and any one of us could face living with the horrendous burden this grandfather has. Yes, I agree  he was careless, unthinking...and he’s the only one to blame. But I knew a woman who popped out of her car to get her mail...as she did everyday for decades...and her car with her grandchild rolled into a pond on her property. Or any one of us could pull out to pass on a highway, it just takes a moment and a bad choice that Fate let you get away with a million times before.

 

i think this family cannot see the suffering of the grandfather they love and...at this point...deal   with his responsibility for the death of the child they all adored.

 

I feel for all of them...including the grandfather. This lawsuit will go nowhere. It’s not worthy of my anger or emotion. But that family certainly seems worthy to me of compassion and understanding. 
 

They have a very  painful journey ahead.

[brillohead]

2 hours ago, sharonna3 said:

What I find horrifying after seeing video and pictures is the fact that he didn't put her on the railing as I thought but instead put her on the windowsill, beyond the railing, either standing or sitting (with her legs hanging outside the ship).  Complete negligence and reckless behavior by the grandfather.

This. 

 

Whether he thought there was glass there or not, the video shows VERY clearly that the child was NOT standing or sitting on the safety railing itself -- whether she was through the window or not, she was DANGLING in the air past the safety railing.  The video shows this very clearly -- the child is not standing or sitting on the railing -- she is PAST the railing. 

Even if there was a window there, even if it was closed and secure, the child would have still fallen over four feet onto a hard surface.  

Dropping a child from such a height is certainly liable to cause severe injury up to and including death.  Think about it -- what if Anello had just been holding the child out in front of him, arms fully extended at chest level, and dropped her onto any unpadded surface.... what if he did it in the Windjammer, or Royal Promenade, or the walking area around the pool?  Who would the family blame for that?  What safety standard would they use to sue Royal... the floor is too far away?

HOW ON EARTH is it anyone's fault but Anello's that this baby was dropped from a minimum height of four feet onto a solid surface?   EVEN IF THE WINDOW WAS CLOSED she could have been killed, because it's unsafe to dangle a wiggly toddler above a solid surface like that, ESPECIALLY for that period of time.  

I challenge anyone to grab a 20 pound bag of dog food, kitty litter, potatoes, or whatever the next time you're at the grocery store.  Pick it up and hold it out in front of your chest, arms straight, with nothing to support the bag's weight other than your hands.  Count out 30+ seconds... how secure is that bag feeling in your grip?  Now imagine that it's a wiggly child.... do you feel totally confident that you wouldn't drop the bag onto the grocery store floor if the bag started wiggling?

Plain and simple, whether he thought there was glass there, whether he held her through the window or just in front of it, NONE OF THAT MATTERS ONE TINY BIT.  The fact that he picked her up and held her like that, unsupported by anything but his own extended arms, above a solid surface -- that's all you need to know in this case.  

The glass doesn't matter.

Him sticking his head through the window doesn't matter. 

The child being through the window or just in front of it doesn't matter.

He held the girl up and dropped her.   Nothing else matters. 

 

Whether she fell on the floor at his feet or whether she fell on the pier, either fall could be deadly. 

 

THE WINDOW/GLASS DOESN'T MATTER. 

[Germancruiser]

Helen- you are right- i did not know that the GF held the toddler out of the window for so many seconds. It made me really gasp, when I watched that video. And I absolutley can´t get over the fact that they even dare holding the cruise line responsible for the GF recless actions- and going so far as to sue the cruise line.

With all this media interesst they make the matter worse and worse by the day.

I hope he meets with a lawyer with a bit common sense - who helds HIM responsible and only HIM!

[luckybecky]

2 hours ago, lovemylab said:

 

The Daily Mail isn't exactly known for high end journalism.

 

The article suggests the man in the reenactment was the same height and stature as Anello, which I have a hard time believing. In the video posted, Anello's entire upper body disappears when he arrives at the window which demonstrates he was able to lean forward.  Furthermore, had the man in the reanactment extended his arms, he'd have been able to dangle the doll out the window.   

 

The family is grasping at straws.

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

I agree. Here is a quote from the step grandfather: "“I remember trying to find her on the floor and then I saw her fall. I saw her fall the whole way down,” the grandfather told CBS through tears. “I think for a while I was just in shock.” This is from this online story https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/grandfather-charged-toddler-s-cruise-ship-fall-says-i-thought-n1091321

 

Now, if it was impossible for him to lean out the window, as he and the attorney are claiming and the staged photos attempt to show, then HOW did he see her "fall the whole way down"? Unfortunately every thing he says to defend himself just doesn't make sense. If he saw her fall, then he must have been able to lean at least part way out the window to see the pier directly below. 

 

It's tragic but I think there is just no excuse for deliberately lifting a toddler up and over a railing. Period. No matter how the family tries to spin it, THAT was the act that caused the poor child to fall.

[mr walker]

7 hours ago, Two Wheels Only said:

Knowing how close the railing is to the window and then claiming that it is "physically impossible" for Anello to lean out of the window is absurd. 

 

What is known is that the guy, by his own admission, dropped the girl. As a result she fell on the outside of the ship.

 

How would she have been on the outside of the ship if he couldn't have leant outside of the window? If he couldn't lean out beyond the window ledge, when he dropped her she would have fallen inside the window and on to the deck, unless he tossed her out the window.

 

The defense argument is an insult to anyone's intelligence.

[CruiszBug]

One thing I keep coming back to is this... we are all judging the step-grandfather's actions using our own sense of right and wrong and comparing them to our own family dynamics. We do not know these people. We do not know this man. We do not know if he is sane, senile, suffering from dementia or Alzheimer's? Something is off from the beginning when he talks about thinking there is "glass and who leaves a window open" on a ship with children? These are not rational comments. Anyone who has walked by an open window on a ship knows there is a breeze in front of it.The windows have a railing/barrier to prevent you from falling into the glass and is too far from the floor to be a danger to children on their own. We project our common moral standards onto him as if it were our child, our family. I cannot imagine this terrible tragedy was intentional since the alternative is too horrible to contemplate. This death will ruin the lives of this family. I am so sad for them and mourn this child who I did not know.

[brillohead]

3 minutes ago, CruiszBug said:

we are all judging the step-grandfather's actions using our own sense of right and wrong and comparing them to our own family dynamics.

Pretty sure that everyone's sense of right and wrong will agree that you don't drop a baby from a height of four feet or more onto a hard surface.

As for comments about dementia/Alzheimer's, the man was 50yo and working in IT -- hardly a doddering old fool.  

[CruiszBug]

4 minutes ago, brillohead said:

Pretty sure that everyone's sense of right and wrong will agree that you don't drop a baby from a height of four feet or more onto a hard surface.

As for comments about dementia/Alzheimer's, the man was 50yo and working in IT -- hardly a doddering old fool.  

I don't remember using the words "doddering old fool" anywhere? My mother used to have random blackouts in her 50's and could not remember what had happened when she fell off her bike, or down the stairs at work and she was a senior executive. My husband's father was in no way doddering but would have bouts of dementia periodically and not remember what year it was. So you used your own compass to judge, right? That is what I am saying. You use your life's experience as part of the yardstick. And as far as everyone's sense of right and wrong... you are speaking of the norm. Not everyone is part of the norm.

[Two Wheels Only]

1 hour ago, mr walker said:

How would she have been on the outside of the ship if he couldn't have leant outside of the window? If he couldn't lean out beyond the window ledge, when he dropped her she would have fallen inside the window and on to the deck, unless he tossed her out the window.

 

The civil attorney is trying to use pictures like this...

 

 

...to try to fool people who have not seen the actual video. 

 

Notice how upright he is?  How upright was Anello?

Notice how close his hands are to his face? How far were Anello's hands from his face?

Notice how the doll is standing inside of the window? How was Chloe sitting on the window sill outside of the window?

 

Not everyone has watched the videos and even some who have seen the videos are watching a version where someone used their phone to record what was on the TV (not good quality). Anyone who was watched the higher quality version or downloaded it in order to analyze it in full screen (as I did last month) will not fall for these staged photos. 

Edited January 24, 2020 by Two Wheels Only

[Hogbay]

why is there a bar in a child's play area don't you have to be 21 to consume liquor?

 

[babs135]

The truth of this terribly sad story is that only two people know what really happened and sadly one of them is dead.  No amount of compensation will bring Chloe back.   The grandfather should accept that an awful misjudgement/accident (call it what you want) happened on his watch and he and the family should try and 'move on' (not easy I know) and grieve the loss of the child; not spending time with lawyers, etc.

[luckybecky]

1 hour ago, Hogbay said:

why is there a bar in a child's play area don't you have to be 21 to consume liquor?

 

 

I haven't  been on this ship and I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the Squeeze bar serves fresh fruit juices and smoothies, appropriate for kids.

Edited January 24, 2020 by luckybecky

[S.A.M.J.R.]

6 hours ago, CruiszBug said:

One thing I keep coming back to is this... we are all judging the step-grandfather's actions using our own sense of right and wrong and comparing them to our own family dynamics. We do not know these people. We do not know this man. We do not know if he is sane, senile, suffering from dementia or Alzheimer's? Something is off from the beginning when he talks about thinking there is "glass and who leaves a window open" on a ship with children? These are not rational comments. Anyone who has walked by an open window on a ship knows there is a breeze in front of it.The windows have a railing/barrier to prevent you from falling into the glass and is too far from the floor to be a danger to children on their own. We project our common moral standards onto him as if it were our child, our family. I cannot imagine this terrible tragedy was intentional since the alternative is too horrible to contemplate. This death will ruin the lives of this family. I am so sad for them and mourn this child who I did not know.

In who's sense of right and wrong is it "right" to hold a child on/over a railing in front of an open window over 100 feet above ground?  The criminal case will say whether a "reasonable" person could behave/think the same.  If he is senile, has dementia or Alzheimer's, does that change what he did?  

[Robinhill]

1 hour ago, Hogbay said:

why is there a bar in a child's play area don't you have to be 21 to consume liquor?

 

It is not a child play area- this is out on the pool deck.

[rusty nut]

13 hours ago, mayleeman said:

 

American legal system disfavors trial "surprises" because many cases are more likely to settle once both sides know all the evidence. If this was a discovery request, all tapes would have to be produced or at least identified. If not produced, there would have to be some explanation of their omission or an assertion of some type of privilege or other legal grounds for withholding them. Parties often claim something is not relevant, but obviously no one can assert that and then later try to introduce a withheld video proving their case.

 

Everyone needs to step back and let the system work before demanding dismissal or accusing the family of greed because they haven't folded once detrimental evidence shows up. We all benefit from a system that lets both sides develop their information rather than depending on media reports, rumor, or layperson social media evaluations of what legal standards are. We can all certainly conjecture about the importance of things like the video, but remember we are not privy to witness interviews, discussions among any of the parties, the police investigatory reports, the prosecutors' view of the public interest, or the experts on both sides likely hired to be evaluating many things. 

 

Any speculation that the grandfather intended this tragedy is repugnant and shameful. That is literally the type of comment that in the past uttered in a crowd could get people lynched--it is unfounded in any evidence, it has never been suggested by anyone with knowledge of the case, and we can only hope that it was suggested by someone who doesn't recognize that blurting out things like that can create an atmosphere of hate tainted by the very suggestion.  

 

 

 

With that, it's a fact that no one, not even you, knows what state of mind the GF was in at the time of the incident. What he says and what his state of mind was could be two entirely different things.

[twins_to_alaska]

The child's play area was the open H2O zone water play area for kids where Chloe was before she crossed to the edge of the ship past the bar with her stepGF following.

[cgolf1]

So, in America we tend to be a bit sue happy and some large companies have a budget to settle lawsuits they could win, but want to avoid the bad press of a trial. I have seen this with other cruise lines. In this case RCCL seems to have done everything by the books by only releasing the video when necessary for the courts or investigators and has not commented in any way about the situation, I could be wrong but haven't read it, despite the family's lawyer saying they are.

 

Since RCCL has decided to fight this, at what point could they counter sue the lawyer or family for defamation? I think the family's lawyer is really walking a fine line here. For once I would love to see a company stand up to one of these lawsuits, perhaps it would limit some similar suits in the future.

 

Regardless I still feel horrible for the family, I couldn't imagine losing a child like that.

[A&L_Ont]

10 hours ago, TNcruising02 said:

I read somewhere that he may have seen a plane or something out the window and held her up to see it too. That sounds like a pretty good guess as to why he did it. Better than him being color blind, not knowing the window was open. He knew it was open. He leaned over the railing before he even lifted her up. 

AA and Delta better watch out, if this suit against RC isn’t successful they might be next.(sarcasm font on)

Edited January 24, 2020 by A&L_Ont

[Junkhouse]

22 minutes ago, twins_to_alaska said:

The child's play area was the open H2O zone water play area for kids where Chloe was before she crossed to the edge of the ship past the bar with her stepGF following.

The family is misrepresenting to the public that the entire area was a child’s play area, yet in the video GF escorts her at least 30 feet to the windows. My analogy would be if your house had a lawn. Kids are playing in your house but you go outside with one to the front yard to look at a squirrel. The squirrel runs across the street, the kid wants to chase the squirrel so you let them then the kid gets hit by a car. 

 

I have empathy for the family, I can’t imagine what they are going through but for some money they want to blame someone else while rehashing this event. That is were my empathy starts to wane.

Edited January 24, 2020 by Junkhouse

[CruisingSince1982]

I doubt he "lied". More than likely he has PTSD and his version is his mind's way of protecting him. The video certainly changes everything, but I would never said he lied.

 

Edited January 24, 2020 by CruisingSince1982

[A&L_Ont]

10 minutes ago, cgolf1 said:

For once I would love to see a company stand up to one of these lawsuits, perhaps it would limit some similar suits in the future.

 

Regardless I still feel horrible for the family, I couldn't imagine losing a child like that.

I fully agree with you on both these points. 

[Another_Critic]

7 hours ago, Two Wheels Only said:

 

The civil attorney is trying to use pictures like this...

 

 

...to try to fool people who have not seen the actual video. 

 

Notice how upright he is?  How upright was Anello?

Notice how close his hands are to his face? How far were Anello's hands from his face?

Notice how the doll is standing inside of the window? How was Chloe sitting on the window sill outside of the window?

 

Not everyone has watched the videos and even some who have seen the videos are watching a version where someone used their phone to record what was on the TV (not good quality). Anyone who was watched the higher quality version or downloaded it in order to analyze it in full screen (as I did last month) will not fall for these staged photos. 

 

That picture is showing the doll's feet close to or resting on the lower window ledge.  Of course the angle is deceiving with the window partition blocking the lower window ledge of the window below the feet.

 

To me, that picture is more incriminating than helpful.  It basically proves that even if he was standing straight and arms positioned as the "actor" (which he wasn't), he would still have the child's feet on or outside the lower window ledge.

Edited January 24, 2020 by Another_Critic

[BSocial]

10 hours ago, Bradison said:

 

Even if this was a static pane of glass and even if he only lifted her onto the wooden rail, this is still a highly dangerous maneuver.  Especially, if the goal is to "let her bang on the glass".

If he loses grip and she falls forward into the glass, she gets injured, no doubt.  

so true