Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can't imagine purposely holding a young child over any kind of precipice. Indeed, when my kids were that young, I had a fear of accidentally dropping them over the foyer balcony after carrying them upstairs. As a result, I would always walk as close to the wall (i.e. as far away from the railing) as I could while I was carrying them.
I was terrified when we went to Garden of the Gods when my son was about 3. He was very active and would dart off with no warning. In one area there was a dropoff and no guard rails. I had a death grip on him, afraid he'd run off the side of that cliff/rock before I could stop him.
They sound pretty annoyed, and I can't say I blame them.
I wonder if they have clearer video. I know many cruise ships have video on the OUTSIDE of the ship. I'm struggling to believe they looked at the video we all watched, and determined he held baby Chloe outside the window for 34 seconds. It's very hard to see that on the video the public has been able to watch. It does appear from the video, that Grandpa leaned out the open window before picking the baby up.
I wonder if they have clearer video. I know many cruise ships have video on the OUTSIDE of the ship. I'm struggling to believe they looked at the video we all watched, and determined he held baby Chloe outside the window for 34 seconds. It's very hard to see that on the video the public has been able to watch. It does appear from the video, that Grandpa leaned out the open window before picking the baby up.
I found RCL's response to the lawsuit in a weird crevasse of the Internet, and they're offering the court the raw surveillance camera files as well as a laptop with their custom video viewer software, so it seems likely that they have better video.
However, RCL calls to dismiss without even using the video, and their arguments echo a lot of those presented in this thread:
Reasonable people are expected to be able to identify widows and act rationally around them
"a shipowner is entitled to assume that a passenger will perceive that which would be obvious to him upon the ordinary use of his own senses"
The building codes cited aren't relevant under maritime law and
the child was perfectly safe until the adult in charge put her in danger
They even have case law supporting the claims - I'll see if I can re-find the link.
This looks like a cleaned up version of the previous one. To me it seems much more obvious that he did in fact lean out of the window with Chloe in his grip.
This looks like a cleaned up version of the previous one. To me it seems much more obvious that he did in fact lean out of the window with Chloe in his grip.
So he lied from the beginning and they decided to sue RC. And they're still sticking to that lawsuit? Not only does he know it's open because he leaned out of it but then he held her out there for thirty-four seconds---and he's still sticking to that hockey glass story?
Good for RC releasing the video. This week the parents were still going on TV stating that RC played a "major role n the death of our child."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
