Just to clarify: Conor’s mothers condo had the type of windows that could be folded into the condo to make cleaning the outside easy. The maid had been cleaning the outisde and left the window folded in. Conor was being chased by his nanny, ran into the room and looked back to see if she was still chasing him, kept running and ran right outside the hole in the wall and fell.
A horrible tragedy.
Yes, that sounds like a tragedy with no guilty party.
It’s entirely possible that everyone - not just the cruise operator, but the family too - was being misled by the grandfather’s obstinate refusal to admit blame for what happened. The family wasn’t there, so they (and their lawyer) can only go off of what he told them. Now that the video is out, the family may be just as dismayed as the rest of us.
Well, it seems that grandpa almost certainly knew the window was open. Unless there is something weird about the angle from which the video was shot, it certainly looks like grandpa stuck his head out the open window before he stuck his granddaughter out there. The negligent homicide charge seems a lot more reasonable in light of this.
Agreed. There is nothing unusual about suing for money when a tragedy happens. That’s how you pay the lawyer who does the litigating. It’s not like the alternative was getting the baby back but they chose to seek money instead.
This too.
The ships that I have been on call those solarium areas. The lower portion is always enclosed up to about 4 feet. The upper portions, it varies. If it’s a chilly day, rainy day or if the ship is in motion at a decent clip (windy day), the crew will close those windows. On warm sunny days in port they generally leave them open. But it varies and there’s nothing improper about a passenger opening or closing the window next to their seat or table.
And I would like to mention that every passenger attends a safety briefing pre-cruise. It’s a big deal and “Don’t stand on or climb on the railings” is a big point.
Fuck! What a horrible video! The parents must be going crazy now. It’s going to make for awkward Thanksgiving dinners even if he gets off the charges.
I was going to suggest this, but you got there first.
Well, I tend to think that an individual’s character might affect the manner in which they react to an unfortunate event. These folk seemed to file suit pretty damned quickly - for something in which the facts seemed to suggest at least SOME responsibility by the grandfather.
I think you’re seriously underestimating how intense the sun is out there. I’ve been on 3 cruises to the Caribbean. Areas that large, as opposed to a tiny stateroom, get hot FAST, no matter how temperature-controlled they try to be. Doors to the outside are constantly opening and closing, if not opened all the time, where the heat can easily be over 100. Meanwhile, the intense sun is beating down on all that glass. Some ventilation is absolutely vital, let they risk getting sued from people passing out due to overheating.
Absolutely. They don’t accept cash on these ships - you pay for everything via a ship pass linked to a credit card. Those purchases have to be tracked so you get an itemized bill at the end of your trip.
Not sure from the video, but perhaps he bumped her lower body against the outside of the window while pulling her back in, and dropped her at that point?
If he truly did refuse a breathalyzer, then he must have been plastered IMO.
And I’ve been on several cruises (though never on Royal Caribbean) and food & drinks were always free. I never had to use my ship pass to get any food or drink, so there wouldn’t necessarily be a record of that. But security camera footage might shed some light, although again, if he refused a breathalyzer, that’s pretty damning.
Not to mention that many people like the fresh air. The top decks of most cruise ships are entirely open, and any idiot could climb over the guard rails and fall overboard…or lift a child up and over the rail and drop them overboard. It’s absurd to think that a cruise ship should be a totally encapsulated vessel like a submarine, in order to prevent morons from killing themselves or their grandchildren.
That most likely depends on the cruise lines- I’m sure the more expensive ones include all drinks. But the mass market lines ( including Royal Caribbean ) don’t - you either buy a package or pay per drink, and both usually involve swiping your ship card.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The guy’s excuse that his colorblindness prevented him from seeing the open window irked me from the beginning. My father was colorblind, and while this did cause occasional problems (sideways-mounted traffic signals being one), he never had a problem being able to tell if a window was open or not.
From the beginning this excuse never held water with me. The “glass” in a hockey rink is impact-resistant acrylic, built specifically to protect the audience from humans and pucks flying at dangerous speed. It’s reasonable to expect that a toddler banging on it will not break through and but her arms and hands.
But allowing a child to bang on a window? That’s a parenting moment, we teach the difference, realize the danger in what we’ve allowed at the hockey rink, and vow never to allow it again. We don’t lift them over a guardrail to try their luck at breaking glass 100ft up.
I realize you hadn’t seen the video yet when you wrote this. But I do think that charging him gave the authorities the necessary reasons to hold the ship in place and do a thorough investigation. This might have been impossible if there were only civil charges to be addressed.
As for whether Grandpa did this on purpose, I think he did. There could be a myriad of reasons, depending upon his personality and the circumstances. Sick person does sick thing, film at 11:00. I’m just glad the PR authorities are going to try and put him away for it.
Could it be an accident? Sort of? I’ve seen many a family member agree to watch a child, and then take risks that would make a mother swoon. I’ve even taken over watching the children of strangers at a BBQ, because I couldn’t bear to see them run head-on towards the grill unchecked. I wished somebody would look into those asshats as well.
I heard that excuse as well, but I would think it would put the liability back on him. If he was colorblind, it seems he should know to exercise extra caution since he has vision issues.
Even with colorblindness, wouldn’t the open window look different than the others? I would expect that window to have some kind of evident visual difference that would make it stand out from the others, such as being brighter while the others were more muted. So even if the colorblindness played a factor, I would expect a person with that condition to realize that since that window looked different, something about that window was different.
cut
missed the edit window.
Okay, I’ll the slight contrarian. The video is grainy, and given the angle of the windows (how they are angled out as they are), it’s impossible to tell without a detailed forensic breakdown (ie: converting body size to measurements and doing a little side-angle-side to figure out just how far over the grandfather protruded) whether or not the grandfather actually broke the plane (protruded past the supposed surface of the window and so had more than just visual cues that it was open) is not at all obvious from the video. Just because he leaned forward out of view does not mean he went out the window: the windows angle well past the interior portion of those vertical frames.
Without such a detailed analysis, I don’t think it’s yet possible to conclude that the grandfather couldn’t possibly have believed the window was closed (though I am and always have been of the opinion that it’s still perfectly reasonable to charge him with a crime regardless).
ETA:
You say you missed the window? Seems like there’s a lot of that going around… (I know, I know, I’m going to hell).
Would there not be a breeze coming through that window?
shrug Depends on how hard the AC was blowing and which direction the wind was coming from.
To be clear, I don’t want to align myself too thoroughly with the “pro-babyslaughterer” position, only to maintain a healthy dose of skepticism for claims made in the media. It seems there is already plenty of (perfectly reasonable) skepticism of claims made by the grandfather and the family, but lest we forget:
Media loves stories about superficially “ridiculous” lawsuits (think hot coffee and McDonald’s) and is more than happy to massage facts to generate clicks, even if a more nuanced review of facts might make it less clear cut.
The cruise line will naturally want to engage in a messaging campaign that absolves them in full and maximizes both consumer and (if applicable) investor confidence, irrespective of whether or not their design for the windows is necessarily safe, and so will spin whatever evidence they have in the light most favorable to them, without feeling obligated to do a forensic breakdown to ensure that the grainy video they’re putting forward as “proof” really shows quite so clearly what they say it does.