Toddler Death Law Suit Update

[ReneeFLL]

On 1/24/2020 at 10:48 AM, CruisingSince1982 said:

Except he never said that. That is not in the official report. That was a media statement. 

Have you seen the official report? Do tell us what else is in there of you have ctually seen it.

[A&L_Ont]

6 hours ago, brillohead said:

Or how about the fact that color blindness isn't an excuse for why he thought there was glass there..... clear is clear, not just a lighter shade of whatever color!!!

It's color BLINDNESS, not color SEE-SOMETHING-THAT-ISN'T-THERENESS.  

Your comment made me think of something, if indeed there is some sort of “truth” to their reasoning. 

If he could not see the glass VS an open window, then who is to say that the entire glass wall even existed. It could have been just metal “picture frames” of nothing. Just the wood hand rail was keeping him from walking off the edge. He should have been holding is GD back, not taking her to the edge of danger. At the same rate, he could have assumed it was just an entire wall of glass. 🤷‍♂️
 

While looking for a pool deck photo, to show/prove my silly comment, I came across this one. By their color blindness discussion the grand daughter could have walked right over the edge of the ship. Should the grandfather not have checked to make sure any glass was there so she could not? 
 

Who ever put this photo together that I found makes some valid points. 
 

[Robinhill]

18 hours ago, Suzieanna said:

It's quite obvious to anybody who knows anything at all about cruise ships who is at fault here.    

 

My concern though is the way it seems to be getting played out in the media.    My colleague asked me about it, framing it like this:-    " Isn't it awful about that poor baby!   Surely the windows should be shut properly in the Childrens' area!"    I asked her about how she pictured the window to be.   She described she imagined a window that opened "out" on hinges to one side and a latch on the other.    She imagined this window "looked" shut, until it was pushed against.   She also did not know about the railing keeping people "back".

 

Another thing which is weird, if he was holding her like the lawyer was holding the doll, she would not have fallen out of the window!   Therefore logic dictates he was NOT holding her like this.   For her to fall OUT, she must have been held out?  Basic physics isn't it?  I don't think those photos have helped his case at all.

 

Why didn't he just say at the beginning what the truth probably was -    we were roughhousing, she likes to be thrown about and dangled over my head etc and she just slipped out of my grip.

 

Some of you may recall a few years ago, a girl climbed on a chair and fell a few storeys down into the atrium on a ship?   Did her family sue???

 

You are so right Suzieanna- This is not "the childrens area"- this is the pool deck.  adults and children use it and look how high up the window is.  It is not something that one including a child would lean out of and fall.  Standing a baby up on the ledge and leaning her out; however, would obviously be neglectful and dangerous.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 4, 2020 by Robinhill
error

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

2 hours ago, A&L_Ont said:

Your comment made me think of something, if indeed there is some sort of “truth” to their reasoning. 

If he could not see the glass VS an open window, then who is to say that the entire glass wall even existed. It could have been just metal “picture frames” of nothing. Just the wood hand rail was keeping him from walking off the edge. He should have been holding is GD back, not taking her to the edge of danger. At the same rate, he could have assumed it was just an entire wall of glass. 🤷‍♂️
 

While looking for a pool deck photo, to show/prove my silly comment, I came across this one. By their color blindness discussion the grand daughter could have walked right over the edge of the ship. Should the grandfather not have checked to make sure any glass was there so she could not? 
 

Who ever put this photo together that I found makes some valid points. 
 

I'm not sure that's a valid argument, and actually might (slightly) help the GF's case.  Don't compare the middle windows to each other.  Compare an open window to the window below.   It doesn't take a great stretch of the imagination that the lower windows CAN'T be open (for the reasons you stated).   Then, when you look at the color difference between the lower windows (that are assuredly NOT open) to the actual open windows in the middle, the difference is not as extreme (when seen from a distance and depending on the angle).

 

However, the way I see the video, he plainly leans over the railing, putting his face within inches (if not through) the window frame before picking Chloe up.  Once he does that, there's no way a reasonable person, color blind or not, would think the window was closed. 

[A&L_Ont]

13 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

I'm not sure that's a valid argument, and actually might (slightly) help the GF's case.  Don't compare the middle windows to each other.  Compare an open window to the window below.   It doesn't take a great stretch of the imagination that the lower windows CAN'T be open (for the reasons you stated).   Then, when you look at the color difference between the lower windows (that are assuredly NOT open) to the actual open windows in the middle, the difference is not as extreme (when seen from a distance and depending on the angle).

 

However, the way I see the video, he plainly leans over the railing, putting his face within inches (if not through) the window frame before picking Chloe up.  Once he does that, there's no way a reasonable person, color blind or not, would think the window was closed. 

 

That's why I called it a silly discussion on my part.  I can poke holes in the theory I had.  

 

However, if he can't honestly tell there is a window present (open or shut) he should be extremely cautious of all areas that have structural glass and even every day windows.  He should/would have had this issue his entire life if that is the case and always been on watch for this type of situation.  Well and above over lifting his GD up onto the railing etc...

[rusty nut]

2 hours ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

I'm not sure that's a valid argument, and actually might (slightly) help the GF's case.  Don't compare the middle windows to each other.  Compare an open window to the window below.   It doesn't take a great stretch of the imagination that the lower windows CAN'T be open (for the reasons you stated).   Then, when you look at the color difference between the lower windows (that are assuredly NOT open) to the actual open windows in the middle, the difference is not as extreme (when seen from a distance and depending on the angle).

 

However, the way I see the video, he plainly leans over the railing, putting his face within inches (if not through) the window frame before picking Chloe up.  Once he does that, there's no way a reasonable person, color blind or not, would think the window was closed. 

Where the windows are open, it's pretty clear that they're slid to the side to open. This creates a "double tinted window where there are two tinted pieces of glass together. I'm pretty sure that when the windows are closed, the tint is the same as the bottom windows.

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

17 minutes ago, rusty nut said:

Where the windows are open, it's pretty clear that they're slid to the side to open. This creates a "double tinted window where there are two tinted pieces of glass together. I'm pretty sure that when the windows are closed, the tint is the same as the bottom windows.

Right.  But the argument is dark/light windows alternating could be perceived as a design.  However, that only works if every openable window is fully open (none are partially open which would throw off the 'design') AND a given guest sees enough windows to establish the pattern.

 

Edited February 4, 2020 by S.A.M.J.R.

[A&L_Ont]

I saw this article from today. I could only watch one video of the two, seeing I live in Canada. The first one wouldn’t play/load for me. From watching the second video, the GF was leaning out the window way before he picked up his GD. He actually looked like he was going to fall out the window before he even picked her up.
 

I’m sure it is the same video circulating that you have all watched but I hadn’t seen it. 
 

https://bcaeagles.com/2020/02/04/new-video-shows-moments-before-toddler-fell-to-her-death-on-royal-caribbean/

[Two Wheels Only]

1 hour ago, A&L_Ont said:

I could only watch one video of the two, seeing I live in Canada. The first one wouldn’t play/load for me.

 

The first video is an old CBS video. CBS has already corrected themselves after it was revealed that the video given to CBS by Winkleman wasn't accurate.

 

1 hour ago, A&L_Ont said:

From watching the second video, the GF was leaning out the window way before he picked up his GD.

 

The 2nd video is a phone video taken of what was broadcast on PR TV. There are several versions of the same thing. What is recorded by phone and what is on YouTube isn't as high quality as the actual broadcast video. Even in low quality, you can see what Anello did.

[sharonna3]

I've seen both video's. The back view one (where the GF squats at a pillar) in my opinion is MORE proof that the GF knew the window was open. While just as distorted as the other one you can see GF lean over railing head downward and head turning left & right and down again before picking up child. It appears he had the child leaning against him on his right before moving her further out in front of him. Possible feet on window sill than sitting. She is held there seconds before she disappears. I truly believe it was a horrible accident, but one created by the GF who put her in the dangerous position. I think the possibility that had the lawsuit not been applied. The  accountable actions of what the GF did would have been left to a horrible tragedy.  

[bonsai3s]

Thoughts and prayers for the family.

 

Just our observation...we spent 6 weeks of the Freedom.

* That so called children's play area was mostly a smoking area for adults.

* We did not see a single child hanging around "that" area.

* I am visually impaired, but I could tell that there were windows open...I can feel the wind...even when the ship is docked.

* We stood there by the window and by the railing.  Yes, there is a gap between the railing and the window.  My guess was there was about 15 inches between the railing and the open window. (Actual distance reported was 19 inches.)

* If I had something in my hands and I dropped it...it would fall into the gap between the railing and the window...down to the deck floor.  I would have to either lean forward or stretch my arms for me to drop something outside.

* We had lunch with a few officers who told us that many of the crew members were traumatized by this incident.

 

The Freedom is currently under going it's amplification in Cadiz, Spain...wondering if they will re-design those windows or that area?

 

Thoughts and prayers for the family.

[Brisbane41]

14 minutes ago, bonsai3s said:

Thoughts and prayers for the family.

 

Just our observation...we spent 6 weeks of the Freedom.

* That so called children's play area was mostly a smoking area for adults.

* We did not see a single child hanging around "that" area.

* I am visually impaired, but I could tell that there were windows open...I can feel the wind...even when the ship is docked.

* We stood there by the window and by the railing.  Yes, there is a gap between the railing and the window.  My guess was there was about 15 inches between the railing and the open window. (Actual distance reported was 19 inches.)

* If I had something in my hands and I dropped it...it would fall into the gap between the railing and the window...down to the deck floor.  I would have to either lean forward or stretch my arms for me to drop something outside.

* We had lunch with a few officers who told us that many of the crew members were traumatized by this incident.

 

The Freedom is currently under going it's amplification in Cadiz, Spain...wondering if they will re-design those windows or that area?

 

Thoughts and prayers for the family.

I am guessing they would have to redesign the entire area to prevent it from becoming some sort of horrible memory for passengers and crew who know of it. Once something tragic like this has happened the ship is tainted and the area needs changing. There will probably be something completely unrecognisable designed into its changes.

[A&L_Ont]

17 minutes ago, bonsai3s said:

The Freedom is currently under going it's amplification in Cadiz, Spain...wondering if they will re-design those windows or that area?

I highly doubt it regarding the windows specifically.  Any changes IMO would in essence state that they do have a safety issue when them. An action that would help to prove the family’s case. 
 

If they decide to make changes to these windows one day, I feel it will be well after this lawsuit has been dropped or settled. They haven’t changed balcony heights, and people have gone over those railings over the years. 

Edited February 4, 2020 by A&L_Ont

[tinkertwo]

2 hours ago, Two Wheels Only said:

 

The first video is an old CBS video. CBS has already corrected themselves after it was revealed that the video given to CBS by Winkleman wasn't accurate.

 

 

The 2nd video is a phone video taken of what was broadcast on PR TV. There are several versions of the same thing. What is recorded by phone and what is on YouTube isn't as high quality as the actual broadcast video. Even in low quality, you can see what Anello did.

What is this second video from a phone?  I have seen a second video but from one of their cameras.  It is of the GF' left side walking over to the window.  

[tonit964]

2 hours ago, Brisbane41 said:

I am guessing they would have to redesign the entire area to prevent it from becoming some sort of horrible memory for passengers and crew who know of it. Once something tragic like this has happened the ship is tainted and the area needs changing. There will probably be something completely unrecognisable designed into its changes.

I don't agree. When the husband murdered his wife on the Emerald Princess ship in the cabin and tried to drag her body on the balcony in Alaska a few years ago, some people here on cc in the thread discussion thought they would no longer have that cabin available to book because of what happened, but it was and has been available to book. 

 

I don't think anything will change other than the windows are sealed shut which I sure hope is not the case.

 

 

[Two Wheels Only]

5 minutes ago, tinkertwo said:

What is this second video from a phone?  I have seen a second video but from one of their cameras.  It is of the GF' left side walking over to the window.  

 

Someone used their phone to record what was on TV. Many people are seeing that video (side view near windows) but the quality isn't as good as the broadcast version. It shows Anello's right side.

 

The video taken from behind Anello is also out there. Some people are seeing what was broadcast in PR and some are seeing what RCCL released. They are the same but the broadcast versions show Chloe actually falling out of frame.

 

As of now, there are no videos/photos taken from outside. Many people suspect that they exist but they haven't been released.

[Germancruiser]

Thoughts and prayers never go amiss- even to these greedy bunch of people who are trying to shift the blame from them to RCI!

They can come up with as many vidoes as the like- the blame is, was and stays with the stupid behaviour of the dear grandpa!

Edited February 5, 2020 by Germancruiser

[SherriZ366]

53 minutes ago, Germancruiser said:

Thoughts and prayers never go amiss- even to these greedy bunch of people who are trying to shift the blame from them to RCI!

They can come up with as many vidoes as the like- the blame is, was and stays with the stupid behaviour of the dear grandpa!

agree

[Domino D]

Liability is not the same as blame.  It is entirely possible that the Grandfather will be found guilty, and Royal still found liable or negligent.  Royal is a big company and they will survive.  I was involved  in a case where a guest at a hotel got drunk and decided to dive into the 4 foot pool.  He was in his 20's, broke his neck, and was paralyzed.  The hotel lost that lawsuit.  Now most US hotels with indoor pools have doors that require key entry. 

 

Someone a few pages ago mentioned reasonable doubt in talking about the Grandfather, you should also know that there will be a question of reasonable care.  Could Royal have anticipated this type of accident and reasonably prevented it?  If the hand rail was further from the window, the window was higher, the windows restricted from opening fully, does this happen?  How hard would it be to prevent even a careless person from being injured?  I am sure that there are ways for the engineers at Royal to make it less likely this type accident ever happens again without completely closing off the decks.  Whether they win or lose the lawsuit, it is likely changes will be made, its a bad image. 

 

I realize that many of you have a high degree of passion for this story, but for me, the family lost a child and gets a pass on any action they take. If it was my child, you all would have a lot more to talk about, because I would make what this family has done look like nothing.   While the grandfather is the primary cause of this child's death, it is also true that Royal could have done more to prevent this type of accident.  Sorry, that's just a legal reality.  There's a reason windows in US public buildings don't open.  Yes I know those are different regulations, but regulations evolve and change.  I remember people saying similar things about personal responsibility when seat belts and car seats became the norm.  Whether Royal is "to blame" or not they should want to make the ships safer.  Safer as in more safe, not that they are unsafe now.  There is an old saying in loss analysis, if you don't prevent something from happening, eventually it will. 

 

Prayers for the family, including the Grandfather.  Regardless of what the courts rule he has to live with this and I don't how.  Finally, hope that Royal can find a way to increase safety without ruining our experience.   In the end, a child is dead.  EVERYTHING that can be done to prevent it from happening again should be done.  Fix problems not blame. 

[brillohead]

18 hours ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

I'm not sure that's a valid argument, and actually might (slightly) help the GF's case.  Don't compare the middle windows to each other.  Compare an open window to the window below.   It doesn't take a great stretch of the imagination that the lower windows CAN'T be open (for the reasons you stated).   Then, when you look at the color difference between the lower windows (that are assuredly NOT open) to the actual open windows in the middle, the difference is not as extreme (when seen from a distance and depending on the angle).

Actually, a better comparison using this photo would be compare the open windows to the sealed windows above. The busy-ness of the balconies of the neighboring ship seen through the windows at this angle can distract from the coloring, but comparing the sky view of the open windows with the sky view of the sealed windows above them shows the true color comparison.  

Similarly, if you were standing near those windows so you could see the neighboring ship's balconies through the open window as well as through the sealed glass below, the blue tint becomes very obvious once again.  

When looking at the same view (sky view or dock view) from an open window and an adjacent sealed window at the same time, there is a very obvious color differentiation.  

[brillohead]

9 hours ago, bonsai3s said:

* We stood there by the window and by the railing.  Yes, there is a gap between the railing and the window.  My guess was there was about 15 inches between the railing and the open window. (Actual distance reported was 19 inches.)

* If I had something in my hands and I dropped it...it would fall into the gap between the railing and the window...down to the deck floor.  I would have to either lean forward or stretch my arms for me to drop something outside.

The distance from the glass to the inner edge of the railing is just a skosh over a foot:

 

The family's attorney brings up a distance of "over eighteen inches" to denote the distance from Anello's face (if standing straight up and down at the edge of the railing without leaning over at all) and where the glass would be (if the window was closed) at that height.  

The attorney came up with that statement to "prove" (in the public/media eye) that the grandfather couldn't possibly have stuck his head out the window before picking up Chloe, as Royal claimed in their motion to dismiss.  Anyone who watches the video, however, knows that Anello bends over the railing, which lowers his face from his full height, so the "over eighteen inches" measurement at that height is irrelevant.

[grapau27]

2 hours ago, Domino D said:

Liability is not the same as blame.  It is entirely possible that the Grandfather will be found guilty, and Royal still found liable or negligent.  Royal is a big company and they will survive.  I was involved  in a case where a guest at a hotel got drunk and decided to dive into the 4 foot pool.  He was in his 20's, broke his neck, and was paralyzed.  The hotel lost that lawsuit.  Now most US hotels with indoor pools have doors that require key entry. 

 

Someone a few pages ago mentioned reasonable doubt in talking about the Grandfather, you should also know that there will be a question of reasonable care.  Could Royal have anticipated this type of accident and reasonably prevented it?  If the hand rail was further from the window, the window was higher, the windows restricted from opening fully, does this happen?  How hard would it be to prevent even a careless person from being injured?  I am sure that there are ways for the engineers at Royal to make it less likely this type accident ever happens again without completely closing off the decks.  Whether they win or lose the lawsuit, it is likely changes will be made, its a bad image. 

 

I realize that many of you have a high degree of passion for this story, but for me, the family lost a child and gets a pass on any action they take. If it was my child, you all would have a lot more to talk about, because I would make what this family has done look like nothing.   While the grandfather is the primary cause of this child's death, it is also true that Royal could have done more to prevent this type of accident.  Sorry, that's just a legal reality.  There's a reason windows in US public buildings don't open.  Yes I know those are different regulations, but regulations evolve and change.  I remember people saying similar things about personal responsibility when seat belts and car seats became the norm.  Whether Royal is "to blame" or not they should want to make the ships safer.  Safer as in more safe, not that they are unsafe now.  There is an old saying in loss analysis, if you don't prevent something from happening, eventually it will. 

 

Prayers for the family, including the Grandfather.  Regardless of what the courts rule he has to live with this and I don't how.  Finally, hope that Royal can find a way to increase safety without ruining our experience.   In the end, a child is dead.  EVERYTHING that can be done to prevent it from happening again should be done.  Fix problems not blame. 

Excellent post.

I feel sorry for the child and the parents and the step GF to a degree.

I think the motive of the step GF as seen in the video leaves a lot to me answered.

[brillohead]

7 hours ago, tinkertwo said:

What is this second video from a phone?  I have seen a second video but from one of their cameras.  It is of the GF' left side walking over to the window.  

There are two angles of RCI security footage.  (Reference to "phone video" is just that the video was recorded by a phone of the video on a screen -- it's not actual video someone recorded on their phone while on the ship.) 

One angle is shot from the middle of the pool deck pointed forward to the port side, and shows the events from behind, looking out the windows (shows Anello's left side and back when he's standing at the railing looking out).  The other angle is shot from the walkway on the port side, pointed aft towards the Squeeze Bar, and shows more of a side view of the events (shows Anello's right side when he's standing at the railing looking out).  

Both videos show the exact same events from two different RCI security cameras at different angles.  

[brillohead]

2 hours ago, Domino D said:

If the hand rail was further from the window, the window was higher, the windows restricted from opening fully, does this happen?

 

If the railing were farther away from the window, people would duck under it to squeeze themselves between the railing and the window.  Then you're right back into a situation where there is nothing between the person and the open window.  

 

 

2 hours ago, Domino D said:

There's a reason windows in US public buildings don't open.

 

The thing is.... this wasn't a window from an enclosed room.  It was a window on an open pool deck.  There's no expectation that you are "indoors and safe from the elements outside" -- if you want that, go to the Windjammer, where there are no railings because the windows don't open.  Same thing in the dining rooms -- those windows don't open.  Same thing in the oceanview staterooms -- those windows don't open.  

This is an outdoor, open pool deck.  It is hot and humid and windows need to be able to open (and more than just a couple inches) to allow fresh air in, and also to allow the people to have a clear view out to take pictures, enjoy the view, etc.  

Untold millions of people with children have cruised on ships with these exact window designs.  Anello is the VERY FIRST person to drop a baby out one of these windows.  It's not a design flaw issue with the ship -- it's a brain function flaw issue with Anello.  

 

[rusty nut]

8 hours ago, Two Wheels Only said:

 

Someone used their phone to record what was on TV. Many people are seeing that video (side view near windows) but the quality isn't as good as the broadcast version. It shows Anello's right side.

 

The video taken from behind Anello is also out there. Some people are seeing what was broadcast in PR and some are seeing what RCCL released. They are the same but the broadcast versions show Chloe actually falling out of frame.

 

As of now, there are no videos/photos taken from outside. Many people suspect that they exist but they haven't been released.

Does anybody have, or can someone post the link of the "actual" broadcast video?