Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
ATC cruiser

Toddler Death Law Suit Update

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, brillohead said:


He could have watched through the glass, too.... the glass goes all the way to the floor.

The bottom glass to the floor wouldn't let him see her fall "all the way down". The only way to see this is to be able to lean out the open window and be looking down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ReneeFLL said:

The bottom glass to the floor wouldn't let him see her fall "all the way down". The only way to see this is to be able to lean out the open window and be looking down.


The windows angle outward from the floor up -- as you can see from this view, you can see the pier below without sticking your head out the window. 

 

rail-sill.jpg.b94f628e94dbfadb803f4f6fb4e05baa.jpg

 

 

I also have to note that Anello's wording might have meant that he saw "that" she fell all the way down to the pier.  He doesn't strike me as the sharpest tool in the shed.... seeing her fall and then seeing her crumpled body on the pier in his mind could mean that he saw her fall all the way down to the pier -- as in, she didn't fall on the floor of the pool deck, she didn't fall on a balcony below, etc.  It doesn't necessarily mean that he actually kept his eyes on her body the entirety of her descent until she landed.


Honestly, I believe that his mind has blocked out pretty much all of what really happened and recreated this entire event in his brain as a form of self-preservation, and very little of what he says about the event is actually accurate -- it's just the story that his brain had to spin together to make it so he could live with himself.  I don't think he's even aware that he's not telling the truth about what happened.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, TNcruising02 said:


That's true.  I wonder how fast a person falls.  If he held her on the window frame and she fell forward, would he have had time to  fall to the ground and watch her fall all of the way down?  Could you see someone fall all of the way down the side of the ship from the lower window or would you need to be at the railing height looking down?  It seems she would not have fallen more than 12 inches from the side of the ship unless she was flung over.  Just speculating.  I would have to be at those windows to know for sure. 

Where she landed would probably be a clue.

This is an interesting thought process. There’s something I’ve been thinking about that I don’t believe has been mentioned in this thread. It seems to me, that, if Chloe had been on the railing, or window sill, and she slipped out of GP’s grip, she would have fallen straight down, not to the pier, but straight into the water. Further, it seems possible that for her to reach the pier from the 11th deck, she would have had to have been swung in that direction. Ever look at the ship while boarding and notice how far away from the pier it is. It’s spaced away from the pier by the humongous fenders that keep the ship from banging into the dock. I would say about 1 and half meters. Which begs the question; why would Anello dangle her daughter out the window, swinging her back and forth toward the pier, and then accidentally drop her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toddlers, in my experience, have the tendency to “push off” with their legs though. So who knows. Only one thing is certain, she wouldn't have fallen if she hadn't been lifted up over the railing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, rusty nut said:

This is an interesting thought process. There’s something I’ve been thinking about that I don’t believe has been mentioned in this thread. It seems to me, that, if Chloe had been on the railing, or window sill, and she slipped out of GP’s grip, she would have fallen straight down, not to the pier, but straight into the water. Further, it seems possible that for her to reach the pier from the 11th deck, she would have had to have been swung in that direction. Ever look at the ship while boarding and notice how far away from the pier it is. It’s spaced away from the pier by the humongous fenders that keep the ship from banging into the dock. I would say about 1 and half meters. Which begs the question; why would Anello dangle her daughter out the window, swinging her back and forth toward the pier, and then accidentally drop her?



If you look at the picture in this post from a bridge wing, you'll see that the pool deck is already wider than the balcony decks below, plus the windows on the pool deck angle outward even more.  

If Chloe pulled away from Anello in some way, that could propel her out the window and away from the ship. 

Similarly if she simply slipped from his grasp, any momentum of her body at that particular moment in time would have a similar effect.  


I saw nothing in either of the two videos that gave any indication that he was swinging her to and fro out the window.   In fact, the mere fact that nobody around Anello on the pool deck took any notice of him with Chloe at the window would lend credence to the fact that he wasn't swinging her back and forth, as that would be very odd behavior and would draw the attention of those in the surrounding area, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, rusty nut said:

This is an interesting thought process. There’s something I’ve been thinking about that I don’t believe has been mentioned in this thread. It seems to me, that, if Chloe had been on the railing, or window sill, and she slipped out of GP’s grip, she would have fallen straight down, not to the pier, but straight into the water. Further, it seems possible that for her to reach the pier from the 11th deck, she would have had to have been swung in that direction. Ever look at the ship while boarding and notice how far away from the pier it is. It’s spaced away from the pier by the humongous fenders that keep the ship from banging into the dock. I would say about 1 and half meters. Which begs the question; why would Anello dangle her daughter out the window, swinging her back and forth toward the pier, and then accidentally drop her?


I agree.  I think this could mean that maybe he was lightly swinging her and she slipped through his grip or he dangled her out of the window.  I do not think she could have landed on the pier if he had her on the railing and she lunged forward. She would have had to have lunged a couple of feet, it seems.

It was reported very early on that he lifted her up in "games."  When I watched the video, it did appear that his shoulders moved.  I just don't think she could have propelled herself from the railing, out of the window, and to the pier when her movement would have been going against the grandfather's grip.

Edited by TNcruising02

Share this post


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

I do not think she could have landed on the pier if he had her on the railing and she lunged forward.


It's VERY obvious from the videos that she was WELL beyond the railing. 

His abdomen was crammed up against the railing and his shoulders were bent over it -- there was no way for her to be on the railing. 

 

Even the family's attorney's "re-enactment" photo shows the doll's feet on the windowsill.  

Share this post


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


The windows angle outward from the floor up -- as you can see from this view, you can see the pier below without sticking your head out the window. 

 

rail-sill.jpg.b94f628e94dbfadb803f4f6fb4e05baa.jpg

 

 

I also have to note that Anello's wording might have meant that he saw "that" she fell all the way down to the pier.  He doesn't strike me as the sharpest tool in the shed.... seeing her fall and then seeing her crumpled body on the pier in his mind could mean that he saw her fall all the way down to the pier -- as in, she didn't fall on the floor of the pool deck, she didn't fall on a balcony below, etc.  It doesn't necessarily mean that he actually kept his eyes on her body the entirety of her descent until she landed.


Honestly, I believe that his mind has blocked out pretty much all of what really happened and recreated this entire event in his brain as a form of self-preservation, and very little of what he says about the event is actually accurate -- it's just the story that his brain had to spin together to make it so he could live with himself.  I don't think he's even aware that he's not telling the truth about what happened.  

One can only see the far side of the pier from inside as shown in the above shot so Anello must have had his head outside the window to be able to see Chloe fall all the way down to the pier. She would have fallen close to the ship on the ship's side of the pier.

Below are a frontal shot of Freedom and one of her at Labadee's pier. As one can see the ship side goes very straight down to the waterline.

PA290603.JPG

PA270552.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, robtulipe said:

One can only see the far side of the pier from inside as shown in the above shot so Anello must have had his head outside the window to be able to see Chloe fall all the way down to the pier. She would have fallen close to the ship on the ship's side of the pier.


But also in the photo I mentioned, the camera isn't beyond the railing, as Anello would have been (either while he was bent over the railing or as he was crouched under it after she fell).  

 

19 minutes ago, robtulipe said:

Below are a frontal shot of Freedom and one of her at Labadee's pier. As one can see the ship side goes very straight down to the waterline.


The picture shows the exact opposite.

 

The HULL goes straight down, but the balconies and the pool deck stick out from the hull on this class of ship.  Even if she fell straight down from the window, without any outward motion at all, Chloe would have been unlikely to hit the water.  

 

sideofship.png.9807af2d773f83199c19681067598ba4.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, TNcruising02 said:


That's true.  I wonder how fast a person falls.  If he held her on the window frame and she fell forward, would he have had time to  fall to the ground and watch her fall all of the way down?  Could you see someone fall all of the way down the side of the ship from the lower window or would you need to be at the railing height looking down?  It seems she would not have fallen more than 12 inches from the side of the ship unless she was flung over.  Just speculating.  I would have to be at those windows to know for sure. 

Where she landed would probably be a clue.

9.8m/s squared, it would have taken Chloe a mere 3.5 seconds to reach the pier at 60 mph.  Sorry for the information but these are the facts.  

Edited by Magicat

Share this post


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


But also in the photo I mentioned, the camera isn't beyond the railing, as Anello would have been (either while he was bent over the railing or as he was crouched under it after she fell).  

Then why is all of the railing on the right side of the shot. It appears to me that the camera was over the outer edge of the railing.


The picture shows the exact opposite.

 

The HULL goes straight down, but the balconies and the pool deck stick out from the hull on this class of ship.  Even if she fell straight down from the window, without any outward motion at all, Chloe would have been unlikely to hit the water.  

 

sideofship.png.9807af2d773f83199c19681067598ba4.png

The ship isn't right against the pier as there are very large and thick rubber bumper separating it from the pier which even with the overhang of the pool deck would likely make the impact location on the ship side of the pier.

Share this post


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

It boils down to GF's poor judgement.  So, why did he have poor judgement?  Does he take psych meds?  Did he have a few drinks?  I think it was an awful accident, but WHY did it happen?  Hard questions will be asked.

Or was it simply a "brain fart", or lack of experience with handling little children?

 

I don't read anything nefarious into her striking the dock instead of the water, even if he hadn't actually held her outside the window, but only on the ledge.

 

Her fall would have lasted only 3-4 seconds.

 

I also won't attribute any nefarious motives to the grandfather or the parents, I believe it was in fact a person who had little day to day experience with a toddler making a brain dead decision, and these were the unfortunate, fatal consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was an accident, but I do not think it happened as the grandfather is claiming it did.  I think some of her body was outside of the window frame and not simply between the railing and the window frame.  I think he knew the window was open.  He should have just accepted responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the 2 videos RCI has released. In one of them the GF appears to hoist Chloe above his shoulder, almost perching her on his shoulder as he leans a little toward the open window. Being on his shoulder, she's leaning at an even greater angle toward the window.

 

He was a couple of feet from the window at that point, but with both of them leaning their upper bodies were much closer to the open window.

Edited by Snowrose

Share this post


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

He was a couple of feet from the window at that point, but with both of them leaning their upper bodies were much closer to the open window.

The railing is 12" from the window sill.  If his body is against the railing, he wasn't a "couple of feet" from the sill.  

 

I think the entire thought process of "he must have been swinging her in order for her to fall out so far" needs to be stopped.  Yes, if she was at a certain point in space and he simply let go, she would go straight down.  But any movement on her part or his  (leaning, pushing, whatever) as he lost his grip would have impacted the direction.  

 

And either people are seeing better video than la comay posted or they're reading a lot into it.  I don't see where the quality of the video is good enough to see sun on their faces, getting bumped from a nearby passenger, or shoulder movement. 

Share this post


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

The railing is 12" from the window sill.  If his body is against the railing, he wasn't a "couple of feet" from the sill.  

 

I think the entire thought process of "he must have been swinging her in order for her to fall out so far" needs to be stopped.  Yes, if she was at a certain point in space and he simply let go, she would go straight down.  But any movement on her part or his  (leaning, pushing, whatever) as he lost his grip would have impacted the direction.  

 

And either people are seeing better video than la comay posted or they're reading a lot into it.  I don't see where the quality of the video is good enough to see sun on their faces, getting bumped from a nearby passenger, or shoulder movement. 

 

At the time the video that I saw ended (I don't know if it was the same video linked here), his body was not against the railing. He was a couple of feet away - but he had the child at or above his shoulder height, both hands above his head. Holding the child that high will completely change the trajectory for her to go out the window, making it more likely she could fall out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Snowrose said:

 

At the time the video that I saw ended (I don't know if it was the same video linked here), his body was not against the railing. He was a couple of feet away - but he had the child at or above his shoulder height, both hands above his head. Holding the child that high will completely change the trajectory for her to go out the window, making it more likely she could fall out.

I went back and looked at the two videos from the security cameras.  I never see Chloe above his shoulder height (maybe her head, but definitely not her body), and I never see his hands above his head.  I still say he was up against the railing.  I wish CC would let us link the videos so we could understand what others are seeing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a 1 degree trajectory from 150 feet, Chloe would have fallen approximately 2 1/2 feet from where the window protrudes from the ship.  With about 6 feet of bumper she would only have to be dropped with a minimal "push" outwards to 2 degrees or more to hit the pier.

I remember watching a show on stunt actors where they said that just stepping of a roof you will propel yourself 10 feet or more before hitting the ground or soft pad.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, brillohead said:

..........  In fact, the mere fact that nobody around Anello on the pool deck took any notice of him with Chloe at the window would lend credence to the fact that he wasn't swinging her back and forth, as that would be very odd behavior and would draw the attention of those in the surrounding area, IMO.

What about Anello holding Chloe up to an open window. That is very odd behavior. Why didn't anyone notice?

Share this post


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


It's VERY obvious from the videos that she was WELL beyond the railing. 

His abdomen was crammed up against the railing and his shoulders were bent over it -- there was no way for her to be on the railing. 

 

Even the family's attorney's "re-enactment" photo shows the doll's feet on the windowsill.  

The re-enactment shows the stand in for Anello, standing nearly straight up at the window with his arms bent. Anello, as seen in the video, is squished up against the railing with his arms not visible and he was bent over. The re-enactment is totally not what is shown in the video hence it is very inaccurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, coffeebean said:

What about Anello holding Chloe up to an open window. That is very odd behavior. Why didn't anyone notice?

I'm not sure I would consider that "odd".  Unsafe, yes.  But I don't know that I'd approach someone holding a child up on the railing or near the window.  I'd assume they'd have a death grip on the child and who knows what kind of response you'd get from them. 

Share this post


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

I'm not sure I would consider that "odd".  Unsafe, yes.  But I don't know that I'd approach someone holding a child up on the railing or near the window.  I'd assume they'd have a death grip on the child and who knows what kind of response you'd get from them. 

I have thought about whether I would have approached the step GF if I were nearby.  I don’t think I would have because that might have startled him, causing Chloe to fall.  I have mostly lurked on this thread, but have been following the story since it happened last July.  I sincerely hope justice is done for Chloe by convicting her GF and dismissing the lawsuit brought by her parents.

Share this post


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

Then why is all of the railing on the right side of the shot. It appears to me that the camera was over the outer edge of the railing.

 

The camera is above the railing.  Like directly above it.  Maybe a tiny skosh closer to the window than to the pool, but only the tiniest bit.  Not "way past/beyond" like Anello's head would have been while leaning over or kneeling under the railing.   (Note how you're seeing the TOP of the railing, not the side of it, in the photo.) 

 

5 hours ago, robtulipe said:

The ship isn't right against the pier as there are very large and thick rubber bumper separating it from the pier which even with the overhang of the pool deck would likely make the impact location on the ship side of the pier.

 

I don't doubt that she could have landed "right of center" on the pier, but she most certainly would not have landed in the water unless the ship was at sea at the time of Anello's brain fart.  

Edited by brillohead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if if really was going to let her bang on the window, was he planning on letting go of her?  Because, window or no window, it seems like he would have been holding her since she was so far off of the ground.  So his comment about the window really makes no sense.  Was he going to just let go of her to bang on it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Magicat said:

9.8m/s squared, it would have taken Chloe a mere 3.5 seconds to reach the pier at 60 mph.  Sorry for the information but these are the facts.  

9.8m/s2 is the rate of acceleration due to gravity and not the actual velocity (speed) of the falling object.  It was funny when I took all of those physics classes in college it got beat into our heads.  Then I got into the real world (of the U.S.) and suddenly everyone was saying it was 32 feet/second squared.  Metric system be damned.

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...