Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
ATC cruiser

Toddler Death Law Suit Update

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, boscobeans said:

 

Several offenses all fall under the main heading of HOMICIDE.

Legal Definition of homicide
1 : a person who kills another. 
2 : the killing of one human being by another (as intentionally, with premeditation, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence)

 

Criminal negligence refers to a mental state of disregarding known or obvious risks to human life and safety.

 

 

You don't need to explain it to me, I'm with you on this.😊 I just noticed instead of saying "accident or mishap" you described it as homicide. Hence my "wink" emoji.( like, "I got where you're coming from")

 

Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, tonit964 said:

You don't need to explain it to me, I'm with you on this.😊 I just noticed instead of saying "accident or mishap" you described it as homicide. Hence my "wink" emoji.( like, "I got where you're coming from")

 

Oh well.

As you can see from post 1032  just above , some people don't understand how broad a range of offenses homicide covers.

I am sorry if I worded my response the wrong way.

 

It is like dropping an air conditioner out a window accidently and it beans and kills someone.

 

It is still a homicide but one without criminal intent to kill someone..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, boscobeans said:

As you can see from post 1032  just above , some people don't understand how broad a range of offenses homicide covers.

I am sorry if I worded my response the wrong way.

 

It is like dropping an air conditioner out a window accidently and it beans and kills someone.

 

It is still a homicide but one without criminal intent to kill someone..

It is not

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=homicide

Edited by cruisinfanatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, cruisinfanatic said:

 

HOMICIDE IS A BROAD TERM, 

 

Negligent homicide is the killing of another person through gross negligence or without malice. It often includes death that is the result of the negligent operation of a motor vehicle, which includes the operation of a boat or snowmobile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, boscobeans said:

 

HOMICIDE IS A BROAD TERM, 

 

Negligent homicide is the killing of another person through gross negligence or without malice. It often includes death that is the result of the negligent operation of a motor vehicle, which includes the operation of a boat or snowmobile.

two different things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tonit964 said:

You referred to it as a homicide.

Well, grandpa has been charged with Negligent Homicide.  Based on his actions this is as it should be. 

 

Negligent homicide is a criminal charge brought against a person who, through criminal negligence, allows another person to die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, cruisinfanatic said:

two different things

THE WORD HOMICIDE IS THE ISSUE... 

 

Granted the following is only the law in one State but it is pretty much the same in the entire US.

 

If gramps caused the death by his reckless and negligent actions it is a negligent HOMICIDE... HOMICIDE

 

Criminally negligent homicide in New York is outlined under the state’s criminal statute 125.10.

 

It occurs when a person causing the death of a human being in a way that was careless, reckless or inattentive.

 

This means an individual accused of a crime didn’t mean to kill the alleged victim. However, their actions were so bad that a person died.

 

A person can be accused of criminally negligent homicide if they fail to act. Their failure to act such as the failure to provide care for someone results in death of that person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just put bars on the windows to keep people from dropping their children out... Keep in mind... many cruise ships, if not most,  have set ups like this and to my knowledge this is the first time someone has had their child fall out.... 

So let us imagine a situation like Costa Concordia or a fire on board and if windows barred or screened as is suggested... then people could end up being trapped with no way out of that area. Then their relative sue because the windows were blocked... and on it goes.... over and over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

Or the inner deck? 

 
or 

EE87921F-7758-4511-AA8F-26BB8AD75B8C.jpeg.42969145288d5bf2fa412e1fc1938e0b.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

If Anello had any sense, he wouldn't have held her over the railing and next to the window.  

If any of them had any sense they would just accept the fact he did a very reckless act which caused her death.

Shut up and let the court slap him on the wrist.

But no. It is more sense to put the blame on someone else. ??????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, in rod we trust said:

yes but he opened the window . every yr locks are inspected  by tradie or council for compliance .. the difference is the GF didn't open the window it was already open 

 

What if someone in the places you rent out opened the window, and then someone else went and dropped a kid out? 

Your locks and all that are still inspeceted, and the dropper didnt open the window...

Same argument...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps this argument should be turned around. Perhaps parents or those taking charge of children should have to prove that they are not complete idiots before being allowed to board... a test of some kind. combine that with a background check to make sure passengers have no drunk driving convictions or things that might impair their judgement. This was clearly a tragic mistake... but the railing was a full 12 inches or more away from the window... the railing was intended to be clue.. a hint... this is the edge of the ship do not pass..... Again you can't fix stupid.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kearney said:

Perhaps this argument should be turned around. Perhaps parents or those taking charge of children should have to prove that they are not complete idiots before being allowed to board... a test of some kind. combine that with a background check to make sure passengers have no drunk driving convictions or things that might impair their judgement. This was clearly a tragic mistake... but the railing was a full 12 inches or more away from the window... the railing was intended to be clue.. a hint... this is the edge of the ship do not pass..... Again you can't fix stupid.  

 

That was discussed days ago, sorry we missed you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rusty nut said:

..... I can guarantee you, with absolute certainty, that Anello did not read the contract. That's what his lawyers are counting on. "You Honor, my client had no idea the railings were for safety, he didn't read the contract, how would he know."

The whole thing is a joke, really.

Ignorance is no excuse for the law. IMHO, same goes for signing a contract. If you sign a contract but don't read it, it is your loss in a court of law. Not reading the contract is not going to exonerate Anello in court. Sorry folks, it just doesn't work that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, phabric said:

The GD would be moving in the GF arms, maybe he lost his hold of her.  He should have left on the ground to bang on the window.

What was Anello thinking? The glass windows go all the way to the floor. Chloe had a great view from where she was standing ON THE FLOOR for crying out loud. She could bang all she wanted while she was standing on the floor. Why put his GD in harm's way by lifting her up to the window well above her head?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Another_Critic said:

 

I have bars on my car windows, because it's driven in a kid's play area (and I have bars in that area too).

Don't all cars have a locks so passengers can not open the windows? (controlled by the driver) My concern is what if an extraction needs to be done by breaking the window in the event of an accident? Would the bars prevent the person from being extracted from the car?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this just happened and made me go...hmmmmm.  My DW looked out the kitchen window to see the neighbour's cat in our car.  I looked out and the passenger side window was open.  So how did a coloured blind cat know the window was open?  Now she is only 3 years old nowhere near considered elderly, however she is grey/silver haired, but nonetheless, she figured it out.  Maybe she would do well in IT.

 

Edited by Magicat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like there will some type of video footage that shows outside the window.  If so, I am not sure how the defense will be able to spin it.  They would probably have a better defense by saying the man wasn't feeling well and asking for mercy.  It's sad that the most he can get is probation.  So, you can dangle a child outside of a window and the most you can get is probation?  Something is seriously wrong if that is the case.

If outside footage shows him dangling the child out of the window for 30 seconds, then there's no disputing it for the criminal trial or for the civil case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, TNcruising02 said:

It seems like there will some type of video footage that shows outside the window.  If so, I am not sure how the defense will be able to spin it.  They would probably have a better defense by saying the man wasn't feeling well and asking for mercy.  It's sad that the most he can get is probation.  So, you can dangle a child outside of a window and the most you can get is probation?  Something is seriously wrong if that is the case.

If outside footage shows him dangling the child out of the window for 30 seconds, then there's no disputing it for the criminal trial or for the civil case.

I was thinking about this today.  While I do expect there is video footage of the outside of the ship, I wonder if you will actually be able to tell anything from it.  If you think about how long the ship is, unless you have a lot of cameras, I don't know that details will be good enough to see whether Chloe was actually outside of the window before the fall. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

San Juan does not have a port webcam.  

 

Edited to correct error

Edited by tinkertwo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tinkertwo said:

I could be wrong....I don't believe that cruise ships do have cameras for the outside of the ship.  In relative terms, it's really only be recent that they have installed motion detectors for man over board.  

 

Also, San Juan does not have a port webcam.  

Cruise ships have had cameras below the bridge wings that show the whole side of the ship for decades.  And most cruise ships do not have man overboard motion detectors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting that the lawsuit states:
 

"An inspection of the scene after the subject incident revealed that all the glass panes around the single open pane of glass were closed and that this was the only single pane, among dozens of panes, that was slid completely open."

However, when I viewed the clip from the pool area looking toward the windows as he walks toward the window, it appears that another window to the right is also open.  I could be wrong, but it sure looks like it. Not that it really matters.  Maybe the other one wasn't "completely" open and that's why the attorney included the word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Cruise ships have had cameras below the bridge wings that show the whole side of the ship for decades.  And most cruise ships do not have man overboard motion detectors.

So there!  Lol.  Okay, I did say I could be wrong.  

 

Edited by tinkertwo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, coffeebean said:

What bothers me about the lifeguards on Royal ships is they must stand while they are on duty. What would it take to give the life guards a tall chair like the lifeguards have on beaches? Well, maybe not quite as tall as on beaches but taller than a standard chair. Maybe the height of a bar stool.

There is a difference between a beach.  The chairs on the beach give the lifeguards height to look over waves along with looking longer distance to the right and left of the life guard stand.

 

With pools and their vertical sides  a chair could create a blind spot at the bottom of the pool next to the side.  By positioning the life guard close to the side, the blind spot goes away.

 

Also the lifeguards are rotated, so they are not standing hours and hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Member Cruise Reviews
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...