Grandfather sentenced for death of granddaughter

[sparks1093]

31 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

Their argument is that the ship wasn’t built to land standards, where windows have screens for safety. Ships were never built to land standards of construction, but it was their point from the beginning that they are designed to be unsafe.

 

The Chief talked about this a fair amount when this was more active last spring when the case was filed. 
 

Edit to add: The Chief just responded before me in the post above. 😁⬆️

Yes, I think their argument is misplaced as well.

[chengkp75]

Just now, sparks1093 said:

I personally feel that if Royal had a duty that they met it, but unfortunately in court logic and reason don't always prevail.

As you say, that is why we have lawyers.  It is not about the truth or facts all the time, it is about what the lawyers can make the jury believe.

[A&L_Ont]

2 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

Where do you draw the line?  Should there be signs on all the open decks and balconies stating not to stand on safety rails and ledges?  Should balconies now be enclosed to prevent falls? Should there be signs warning people not to throw things off the ship when in port as it could fall on and injure a passerby?  Should there be warning signs for every stupid thing a passenger is capable of doing?  

If there are enough lawsuits it will look like that eventually, or the cruise ships will post every possible sign they can think of to prevent a suit. Law firms will still find something to sue over. That’s what lawyers do. 

[sparks1093]

21 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

The two british tourists were killed by a garbage truck driver near new york's penn station. He LIED about having epilepsy to get his driving licence and was done for "depraved indifference" second degree murder and was convicted and got I think 20 to life. Maybe he refused a deal?

 

Has a drunk driver who killed ever been convicted of murder in America with "depraved indifference" or similar law?

I'm sure that such a case has happened if evidence of wanton disregard was developed, but it all comes down to developing such evidence and then convincing a jury.

[livingonthebeach]

1 minute ago, A&L_Ont said:

If there are enough lawsuits it will look like that eventually, or the cruise ships will post every possible sign they can think of to prevent a suit. Law firms will still find something to sue over. That’s what lawyers do. 

 

Yes, that is the sad truth. 

[sparks1093]

7 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

I can see how an unattended child could conceivably climb unto a chair or lounge chair and stand on the window ledge and eventually fall out an open window.  Maybe there should have been a warning sign?  But since in this case the child could not have fallen 150 feet down without the aid of the family member, there is definitely some type of comparative or contributory negligence.

 

Where do you draw the line?  Should there be signs on all the open decks and balconies stating not to stand on safety rails and ledges?  Should balconies now be enclosed to prevent falls? Should there be signs warning people not to throw things off the ship when in port as it could fall on and injure a passerby?  Should there be warning signs for every stupid thing a passenger is capable of doing?  

Would a warning sign prevent a 2 year old from doing something? or a 5 year old? I don't know where the line is drawn, that's why we have lawmakers, courts and lawyers, to hammer all of that stuff out. 

[A&L_Ont]

2 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

Yes, I think their argument is misplaced as well.

I agree. A lawyer will disagree with us.😉

[sparks1093]

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

As you say, that is why we have lawyers.  It is not about the truth or facts all the time, it is about what the lawyers can make the jury believe.

Exactly and in this case I'm rooting for Royal, but I doubt that I'll be on the jury.🙂

[sparks1093]

1 minute ago, A&L_Ont said:

I agree. A lawyer will disagree with us.😉

Likely, but only if he or she was getting paid to disagree with us.😀

[livingonthebeach]

Just now, sparks1093 said:

Would a warning sign prevent a 2 year old from doing something? or a 5 year old? I don't know where the line is drawn, that's why we have lawmakers, courts and lawyers, to hammer all of that stuff out. 

 

No, but it would alert the parents that they should not leave their children unattended or in the care of someone of dubious judgement.  

[sparks1093]

1 minute ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

No, but it would alert the parents that they should not leave their children unattended or in the care of someone of dubious judgement.  

Most parents would do that without a sign and I doubt that a sign would make a difference for those who wouldn't. 

[A&L_Ont]

Just now, sparks1093 said:

Would a warning sign prevent a 2 year old from doing something? or a 5 year old? I don't know where the line is drawn, that's why we have lawmakers, courts and lawyers, to hammer all of that stuff out. 

If there was a sign saying do not “put” things outside the window, it may have resolved RC in this matter. Lawyers are here to prove these laws wrong/flawed, even though common sense says don’t do something. 
 

Let’s see how many lawsuits come from Covid, when it is the fault of a pandemic. In fact a CC member, who is in legal profession, said she would sue and DR or Hospital that gave it to her. It’s impossible to prove where you get it, but she’s ready to throw down. 

[livingonthebeach]

1 minute ago, sparks1093 said:

Most parents would do that without a sign and I doubt that a sign would make a difference for those who wouldn't. 

 

True, but that would cover RCI in liability cases like these. 

[A&L_Ont]

The Gorilla Glue hair lady is a prime example. How many warnings and signs does one need, but yet here comes the lawsuit. 

[livingonthebeach]

4 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

The Gorilla Glue hair lady is a prime example. How many warnings and signs does one need, but yet here comes the lawsuit. 

 

Yet imagine had there not been any warning signs...treble damages?

[Sunshine3601]

10 hours ago, Two Wheels Only said:

 

People on the ship saw the body before it was quickly covered. The people who ran to the windows immediately after the fall most certainly saw the body. I have photos/video of the covered body and you can still see body fluids on the concrete. Not trying to upset people but it happened and people saw the result.

Glad I didnt see that video.

Maybe everyone on the ship should sue him for ruining their vacation and seeing what they saw.

I know he was a step grandfather.  Does anyone know if he has any children of his own?  Maybe he didnt know how to handle a toddler.

[sparks1093]

28 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

If there was a sign saying do not “put” things outside the window, it may have resolved RC in this matter. Lawyers are here to prove these laws wrong/flawed, even though common sense says don’t do something. 
 

Let’s see how many lawsuits come from Covid, when it is the fault of a pandemic. In fact a CC member, who is in legal profession, said she would sue and DR or Hospital that gave it to her. It’s impossible to prove where you get it, but she’s ready to throw down. 

That will be the plaintiff's point- if Royal had had a sign up then this tragedy might have been avoided but they didn't have a sign so they failed in their duty of care. (That was the plaintiff's case in the McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit as I recall, that the warning on the cup wasn't big enough.)

[sparks1093]

22 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Yet imagine had there not been any warning signs...treble damages?

It depends on the jurisdiction but here in order to be entitled to extraordinary damages one has to prove more than simple negligence, which is all a breach of duty of care typically involves. And unfortunately people doing stupid things is why we have so many inane warnings on so many things. Sometimes it's the result of a lawsuit but more often it is the result of a staff attorney being cautious.

[livingonthebeach]

3 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

It depends on the jurisdiction but here in order to be entitled to extraordinary damages one has to prove more than simple negligence, which is all a breach of duty of care typically involves. And unfortunately people doing stupid things is why we have so many inane warnings on so many things. Sometimes it's the result of a lawsuit but more often it is the result of a staff attorney being cautious.

 

Just glanced over the plaintiff's preliminary response in opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss.  I'm not an attorney but I believe you are.  Could you translate this for us?

 

COUNT I – GENERAL NEGLIGENCE …. The above acts and/or omissions caused and/or contributed to Chloe’s untimely death because the subject incident would not have occurred but for such acts and/or omissions. COUNT II – NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO MAINTAIN …. The above acts and/or omissions caused and/or contributed to Chloe’s untimely death because the subject incident would not have occurred but for Defendant’s failure to adequately inspect and/or maintain the Deck 11 windows aboard the vessel. COUNT III – NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO WARN …. The above acts and/or omissions caused and/or contributed to Chloe’s untimely death because the incident would not have occurred had Defendant and/or its agents, servants and/or employees adequately warned and/or communicated the foregoing to the family.

[BSocial]

1 hour ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Where do you draw the line?  Should there be signs on all the open decks and balconies stating not to stand on safety rails and ledges?  Should balconies now be enclosed to prevent falls? ...

In one early thread on this sad case,  it was noted  the wording in Royal Caribbean’s Cruise ticket Contract, It said something prohibiting any unsafe action such as climbing on or over any railings or safety barriers.     if anyone has a printed Cruise ticket contract from that time period they could find the explicit verbiage,    Grandfather had to have agreed to this contract to get set sail pass.  While not a sign, it is proof of notification that must be accepted, in order to cruise.
 

   ( Current cruise ticket on RC site has been modified with a lot of CoVid info, and I can’t find the safety clause from before about not climbing in or over railings or safety barriers). 
 

Edited February 10, 2021 by BSocial
Added

[RFerrington]

1 hour ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

I can see how an unattended child could conceivably climb unto a chair or lounge chair and stand on the window ledge and eventually fall out an open window.  Maybe there should have been a warning sign? 

Not disagreeing with you....but for the example you noted, a warning sign would have been useless.  If a young child is going to climb up on pool furniture, then stand on the railing, they would not be able to read a warning sign even if it were posted.

[livingonthebeach]

9 minutes ago, BSocial said:

In one early thread on this sad case,  it was noted  the wording in Royal Caribbean’s Cruise ticket Contract, It said something prohibiting any unsafe action such as climbing on or over any railings or safety barriers.     if anyone has a printed Cruise ticket contract from that time period they could find the explicit verbiage,    Grandfather had to have agreed to this contract to get set sail pass.  While not a sign, it is proof of notification that must be accepted, in order to cruise.
 

   ( Current cruise ticket on RC site has been modified with a lot of CoVid info, and I can’t find the safety clause from before about not climbing in or over railings or safety barriers). 
 

 

On page 11 of the 16 page contract:

. "PASSENGER AGREES TO SOLELY ASSUME THE RISK OF INJURY, DEATH, ILLNESS OR OTHER LOSS"

 

I guess that covers everything that could possibly happen. 

[livingonthebeach]

1 minute ago, RFerrington said:

Not disagreeing with you....but for the example you noted, a warning sign would have been useless.  If a young child is going to climb up on pool furniture, then stand on the railing, they would not be able to read a warning sign even if it were posted.

 

Correct, however, as I mentioned earlier to the same comment by another poster, it could serve to alert parents not to leave children unattended or in the care of someone with sub-par judgement. 

[ace2542]

1 hour ago, sparks1093 said:

Exactly and in this case I'm rooting for Royal, but I doubt that I'll be on the jury.🙂

I know it won't take place in your state but as a cruiser would you even be allowed on that jury - though you are not really a Royal customer you are more NCL like me - ? Or would you be ruled out during the jury selection process because of your affinity for cruising?

[LilBlackDress]

54 minutes ago, Sunshine3601 said:

Glad I didnt see that video.

Maybe everyone on the ship should sue him for ruining their vacation and seeing what they saw.

I know he was a step grandfather.  Does anyone know if he has any children of his own?  Maybe he didnt know how to handle a toddler.

I am a step-grandmother with no kids of my own. Not that this matters but I was unable to carry a child to term. I became good friends with my DHs ex-wife when we got together. It was what was best for my stepson and I actually enjoyed spending time with her. 

My step-granddaughter was born 3 years after my DHs ex-wife passed away. I am the only grandmother she knows on my stepsons side. (When she gets older we will tell her about Tina, but that is a different post) 

I am about the same age as the step-grandfather... I understand what you are saying that maybe he didn't have kids of his own and didn't know how to handle a toddler. My argument to that is, having kids or not, common sense should kick in! 

 

Another point that has always bothered me about this case was the grandfather's statement that he picked her up to let her bang on the glass like she does at the ice hockey rink! Hello!! Ice Hockey Rinks glass are made of a very thick plexiglass. Most windows are made of glass.  I would guess the cruise ships windows are made of a plexiglass as well but not rated the same, not as thick, not made to be BANGED ON!!! 

Again, Common Sense!!