Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
ATC cruiser

Toddler Death Law Suit Update

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JennyB1977 said:

@S.A.M.J.R. Most folks on this thread think that the Winkleman reenactors/experts haven't been any help to the Wiegand's case. Maybe Perez-Ortiz agrees with most of the people on this board and believes that the Winkleman stuff shows more his clients guilt than his innocence. That could be why he is choosing not to use it.

 

Was just thinking of it this way...

When Anello walks into court he has the presumption of innocence. It is not on his attorney to "prove" he's innocent. The burden lies on the prosecution to prove he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It's possible that based on the evidence he's seen so far that he (Perez-Ortiz) believes that the judge would have some doubt.

Yes, that is how it's supposed to work.  But everyone has their opinions and can we (even judges) totally divorce ourselves from them?  I've been called for jury duty twice.  I was honest both times when questioned and dismissed on both.  The one I will never forget was the accused being a carjacker who pistol whipped the victim and killed the baby she was carrying in the process.  When asked if I could ignore that I said I could not.  Not so much different from this.

Share this post


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

And maybe he can't afford the experts (reenactors & color blindness folks).  I'm just surprised Winkleman isn't helping.


Winkleman’s main focus is his case. To help in the GF’s case is really no concern of his.  He gets no financial gain from helping. His battle is against RC, regarding safety and financial reimbursement for the family’s loss of a daughter, as well as pain and suffering.

Share this post


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

IMO, if the criminal trial comes back with a "guilty" verdict, that hurts Winkleman's case.  "See, a court already found Anello was responsible, so how can RCI also be responsible."  On the other hand, if Anello is found NG, that helps Winkleman. "See, a court already found Anello wasn't responsible, so RCI must be." 

There can be joint responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

There can be joint responsibility.

I don't see that since one is a criminal case and the other civil.  Supposedly, though maybe not realistically, they don't affect one another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:


Winkleman’s main focus is his case. To help in the GF’s case is really no concern of his.  He gets no financial gain from helping. His battle is against RC, regarding safety and financial reimbursement for the family’s loss of a daughter, as well as pain and suffering.

I disagree with the bolded.  I think the GF's case DOES impact Winkleman's case as I have listed a couple different times. 

Share this post


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

I don't see that since one is a criminal case and the other civil.  Supposedly, though maybe not realistically, they don't affect one another.

Didn't say they did.  Just pointed out that in civil cases, it can be found that one person is partially responsible and so is another.  

 

Also,  there is this:

Joint and several liability is a rule followed in some states, in which two or more parties can be held independently liable for the full amount of a personal injury plaintiff’s damages, regardless of their respective degrees of fault. 

 

It gets more complicated, suggest your read the article:

https://www.justia.com/injury/negligence-theory/joint-and-several-liability/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Didn't say they did.  Just pointed out that in civil cases, it can be found that one person is partially responsible and so is another.  

 

Also,  there is this:

Joint and several liability is a rule followed in some states, in which two or more parties can be held independently liable for the full amount of a personal injury plaintiff’s damages, regardless of their respective degrees of fault. 

 

It gets more complicated, suggest your read the article:

https://www.justia.com/injury/negligence-theory/joint-and-several-liability/hall

I'm not a lawyer and, in truth, I hate them.  The words "lawyer" and "liar" are just too similar. But I shall read your link.  However, you mention "some states" - PR is not a state yet.

Share this post


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

I disagree with the bolded.  I think the GF's case DOES impact Winkleman's case as I have listed a couple different times. 


You may disagree with me, but he was hired for one case. The other may concern/relate to his case, however it is not his responsibility to provide experts or opinions. His helping in the one case could negatively effect his case, and that one is his pay. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breaking News per David Begnaud (CBS News):  Sam Anello, the Indiana grandpa charged with negligent homicide after his granddaughter fell from his hands aboard a cruise ship in Puerto Rico will plead guilty in a deal offered by prosecutors. Deal: no jail time, no admission to the facts, probation served in Indiana.

Share this post


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

Breaking News per David Begnaud (CBS News):  Sam Anello, the Indiana grandpa charged with negligent homicide after his granddaughter fell from his hands aboard a cruise ship in Puerto Rico will plead guilty in a deal offered by prosecutors. Deal: no jail time, no admission to the facts, probation served in Indiana.

please provide a link to your source

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, AlyssaJames said:

Good.

 

I guess this doesn’t necessarily stop the civil suit? Or does it?


“This decision was an incredibly difficult one for Sam and the family, but because the plea agreement includes no jail time and no admission of facts, it was decided the plea deal is in the best interests of the family so that they can close this horrible chapter and turn their focus to mourning Chloe and fighting for cruise passenger safety by raising awareness about the need for all common carriers to adhere to window fall prevention laws designed to protect children from falling from windows," a statement from maritime attorney Michael Winkleman of Lipcon, Margulies, Alsina & Winkleman P.A says.”

 

from link post 1661 above.   Still trying to find fault with the ship

Edited by BSocial
Underline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The_Big_M said:

So he's guilty with virtually no penalty. Pretty much a win for him.

 

If that's true that's terrible.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the plea deal, what does Guilty “with no admission of facts” mean?

 

 

Edited by BSocial

Share this post


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

If the above decision/penalty is true then justice has truly been hoodwinked again.

Looks legit. Being reported by all major networks and many high profile print publications now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, BSocial said:

With the plea deal, what does Guilty “with no admission of facts” mean?

 

 

I think it means that it can’t be used against them in their lawsuit against Royal.

Share this post


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

I think it means that it can’t be used against them in their lawsuit against Royal.


thank you

Share this post


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

So he's guilty with virtually no penalty. Pretty much a win for him.

 

If he has any sort of conscience - then he will suffer a lifelong penalty far worse than any court could impose.

Share this post


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

With the plea deal, what does Guilty “with no admission of facts” mean?

 

 

 

Essentially that all he admitted was he was guilty. Sometimes pleas require the person to state for the record what they did which then automatically becomes a fact and the words can be used as fact in a civil case. 

Share this post


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

So he's guilty with virtually no penalty. Pretty much a win for him.

Could be a factor if he is looking for employment.  Probation means he will be meeting with a court officer fairly often.  Probably some fines and court costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about the facts not coming out yet. His eventual deposition should be quite interesting, especially with the video evidence.

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...