This is just so sad,,and makes me ask WHY would someone do this?? I don't call it 'playing'??

[Imzadi]

RCI's statement is so PERFECTLY worded:

'After months of bearing false and inaccurate accusations, from the Wiegands' attorneys through the press, RCL now faces the legally mandated task of responding to a lawsuit the Wiegands' attorneys did not file in good faith,' it charges.

The Weigand's lawyers seem to be ambulance chasers filing a frivolous lawsuit.

'This is not a case of an unknowing child approaching an open window and falling out because the window was defective or improperly positioned.

The window was about 4 ft high. High enough that a young, unknowing child could NOT reach on their own. The ship was designed with a wall of lower panes of glass, precisely so a child would not have to climb up to look through any of the top windows.

'Rather, this is a case about an adult man, Chloe's step grandfather who, as surveillance footage unquestionably confirms: (1) walked up to a window he was aware was open; (2) leaned his upper body out the window for several seconds; (3) reached down and picked up Chloe; and (4) then held her by and out of the open window for thirty four seconds before he lost his grip and dropped Chloe out of the window.

The video footage speaks for itself.

'His actions, which no reasonable person could have foreseen, were reckless and irresponsible and the sole reason why Chloe is no longer with her parents.'

Adults of sound mind and reasonable intelligence just do not dangle a child next to or out a window 11 stories high for 34 seconds. This is not something other people could foresee.

 

[sam_gordon]

This whole situation is horrible. What gets me though is how our legal system allows such frivolous lawsuits to be filed that costs a company hundreds of thousands of dollars in insurance premiums to defend.

But who gets to decide it's frivolous, and at what point? The civil case hasn't seen the inside of a courtroom, I'm not even sure they've taken depositions yet. A judge or some other entity would need to take a look at the facts and decide it's frivolous. But you can't do that before the case is filed. Now, I do believe RCI should file a counter claim to get all of their legal fees back for fighting the lawsuit.

 

[lorimay]

But who gets to decide it's frivolous, and at what point? The civil case hasn't seen the inside of a courtroom, I'm not even sure they've taken depositions yet. A judge or some other entity would need to take a look at the facts and decide it's frivolous. But you can't do that before the case is filed. Now, I do believe RCI should file a counter claim to get all of their legal fees back for fighting the lawsuit.

I really hope they do! They are not responsible and should not be penalized for this mans very bad judgement.

 

[jdb in AZ]

I really hope they do! They are not responsible and should not be penalized for this mans very bad judgement.

The whole thing is such a tragedy. I doubt RCCL will want more bad publicity by prolonging the whole thing. Sometimes large corporations will settle out of court, even when it's not their fault. They just want the whole thing (and expen$ive legal fees and court costs) to go away.

 

[sam_gordon]

The whole thing is such a tragedy. I doubt RCCL will want more bad publicity by prolonging the whole thing. Sometimes large corporations will settle out of court, even when it's not their fault. They just want the whole thing (and expen$ive legal fees and court costs) to go away.

I don't think RCI will settle the civil case. IMO (and I'm not a lawyer nor did I sleep at a Holiday Inn last night), I think RCI would have a case against the lawyer who brought the civil suit against them. It really shouldn't involve the family much, if at all.

 

[ronandannette]

The whole thing is such a tragedy. I doubt RCCL will want more bad publicity by prolonging the whole thing. Sometimes large corporations will settle out of court, even when it's not their fault. They just want the whole thing (and expen$ive legal fees and court costs) to go away.

I think I speak for many in being very pleased that RCCL has not gone this route. The allegation is simply too egregious to be treated as a nuisance. It's worth putting up a robust defense. One has to assume this is not what the plaintiffs (or more to the point their lawyer) were expecting. The only sensible thing left for them to do is to quietly drop the suit.

 

[John VN]

........Adults of sound mind and reasonable intelligence just do not dangle a child next to or out a window 11 stories high for 34 seconds. This is not something other people could foresee.

r.e. -- my bold --

Adults of sound mind AND reasonable intelligence DO STUPID THINGS ALL THE TIME and often fall back on the "Hindsight is 20/20" proverb.

Problem is this WAS SOMETHING other people could foresee and that is why reasonable people with at least 2 properly functioning brain cells don't do.

 

[disneymom3]

r.e. -- my bold --

Adults of sound mind AND reasonable intelligence DO STUPID THINGS ALL THE TIME and often fall back on the "Hindsight is 20/20" proverb.

Problem is this WAS SOMETHING other people could foresee and that is why reasonable people with at least 2 properly functioning brain cells don't do.

I think that’s exactly what they are saying though. No one would ever think anyone would hold a child out a window of an 11 story building so the cruise line had no cause to have warning signs.

 

[DLgal]

So glad to see this statement issued, finally. Good for RCI. They hold NO liability in this tragedy and it would be unfair to punish them in any way. They have an ace writer on their PR team, because that statement is written so perfectly that there is no way anyone will be able to criticize it.

 

[fly girl]

Now, I do believe RCI should file a counter claim to get all of their legal fees back for fighting the lawsuit.

I really hope they do! They are not responsible and should not be penalized for this mans very bad judgement.

The whole thing is such a tragedy. I doubt RCCL will want more bad publicity by prolonging the whole thing. Sometimes large corporations will settle out of court, even when it's not their fault. They just want the whole thing (and expen$ive legal fees and court costs) to go away.

As most of you know I do not hold RCCL accountable for the incident. They are innocent, this was all grandpa's fault.

I truly hope the Weigand's drop the lawsuit against them. Even if they have not seen the tape themselves, at this point, I would be completely shocked they haven't had someone they trust watch the video and relay the information. Naturally my heart goes out the them, they lost their baby girl. But a lawsuit isn't going to to darn thing to get her back, and the company you are suing is not at fault. Where are the paternal grandparents? I wish they could talk sense into them, telling them to move away from this and to create a positive legacy for Chloe. Their denial is understandable, but at some point they have to accept the reality of this nightmare situation and start placing blame on the true culprit.

However, I really hope RCCL doesn't counter sue. Any big business has funds for these kinds of situations. Yes, in the beginning it was horrible press for them, but they have handled it with dignity and class. I think counter suing a grieving family serves no purpose. They don't need the money, RCCL isn't going to file Chapter 11 because of this lawsuit. And I know they have a legitimate reason to file it, it still doesn't make it right. Imho, that would be a low blow, kicking a grieving family when they are down. I honestly would be a little disappointed if they did. YMMV.

I am glad they did NOT settle out of court. I see why corporations do that, it makes sense in many cases. But this one was different. And I am sure they knew it the moment they saw video of it.

I'll say it again, how they handled this situation has been impeccable. They couldn't have handled it any better in my eyes.

 

[sam_gordon]

However, I really hope RCCL doesn't counter sue. Any big business has funds for these kinds of situations. Yes, in the beginning it was horrible press for them, but they have handled it with dignity and class. I think counter suing a grieving family serves no purpose.

While I agree with you, I was picturing suing the lawyer, although I'm not sure what the lawsuit would say. Malpractice? That should come from the family. Defamation? I don't know.

 

[DLgal]

While I agree with you, I was picturing suing the lawyer, although I'm not sure what the lawsuit would say. Malpractice? That should come from the family. Defamation? I don't know.

Defamation would be appropriate, I would think. The lawyers claims that the ships are unsafe for children "in a play area" may have cost the company money in lost bookings or cancellations, in addition to a loss of confidence for potential future cruisers.

 

[sam_gordon]

Defamation would be appropriate, I would think. The lawyers claims that the ships are unsafe for children "in a play area" may have cost the company money in lost bookings or cancellations, in addition to a loss of confidence for potential future cruisers.

Would RCI have to prove that that's why people didn't book though? Hard to prove.

 

[DLgal]

Would RCI have to prove that that's why people didn't book though? Hard to prove.

I don't know how much actual proof defamation lawsuits require. However, there was a lot of negative publicity aimed at RCI immediately following this tragedy.

 

[fly girl]

While I agree with you, I was picturing suing the lawyer, although I'm not sure what the lawsuit would say. Malpractice? That should come from the family. Defamation? I don't know.

Gotcha! He is a snake. I still wonder how they chose him as representation.

 

[gwynne]

Gotcha! He is a snake. I still wonder how they chose him as representation.

She's a very experienced attorney. He's been in law enforcement for some years. They have tons more experience and resources in the community (other attorneys/LE to talk to, ask opinions, bounce thoughts off of and so on...) than most other couples experiencing a tragedy.

They certainly could have made a change in representation, especially as the months went on, if they had wanted to.
And yes, I can say this and still be so sad about their little girl.

 

[fly girl]

She's a very experienced attorney. He's been in law enforcement for some years. They have tons more experience and resources in the community (other attorneys/LE to talk to, ask opinions, bounce thoughts off of and so on...) than most other couples experiencing a tragedy.

They certainly could have made a change in representation, especially as the months went on, if they had wanted to.
And yes, I can say this and still be so sad about their little girl.

That is what doesn't make sense to me. They know the ins and out of law, why would they chose this ambulance chaser of the cruise lines? I just do not understand why they picked him! You'd think they would pick the best of the best. I just don't see Winkelman as that.

Maybe since I am on the outside I wouldn't understand.

 

[Imzadi]

Gotcha! He is a snake. I still wonder how they chose him as representation.

Maybe no reputable lawyer would take their case. They all said, "I feel for you. Sorry for your devastating loss. But there's no case here." Meanwhile, these lawyers pushed how it was RCI's fault, not the grandfather's. And in their grief, they clung to that.

 

[gwynne]

That is what doesn't make sense to me. They know the ins and out of law, why would they chose this ambulance chaser of the cruise lines? I just do not understand why whey picked him!

Maybe since I am on the outside I wouldn't understand.

I don't have any insight into possible reasons either.
Sad.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

He might have been the friend or a BIL of someone they knew.

He might've called them when they were still in a vulnerable state.

I'm not sure he's two-bit as it seems like he has a lot of maritime law experience. I imagine his reputation will suffer as a result of this, though, and maybe his firm, etc.

I so respect RCCL for the way they handled this whole thing. I hope they continue down the same road, and that their business might actually increase because of it, even if it's taken a hit by people who were unsure more recently.